^. 



/^^:? 







EVIDENCES 



NATURAL AND REVEALED 



■7*% 



li^y.^ 



THEOLOGY. 



BY 



CHARLES E. LORD. 



4:t 



^ 




3 80' 

PHILADELPHIA : 

J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO 

186 9. 



\ 






Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1869, by 

J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO., 

In the Clerk'? Office of the District Court of the United States for the Eastern 
District of Pennsylvania. 



MY WIFE, 



MY BEST COUNSELOR AND FRIEND, 



I Affectionately Jjecticate 



THE FOLLOWING PAGES, 



PREFACE. 



It seems most suitable that the first truths which lie at 
the foundation of all Revealed Theology should be consid- 
ered in the light of Xatural Theology; both have a most in- 
timate relation to each other. The present treatise on those 
subjects, which would properly come under the range of 
Natural Theology, is written with the great end in view of 
making more forcible and clear the evidences of the Chris- 
tian religion, and giving to the mind a deeper conviction of 
the supreme authority of Revelation. It will be seen, also, 
that a book that should in one volume treat of the great 
variety of subjects that would come under the head of Xatu- 
ral and Revealed Theology, must of necessity be but a com- 
pend, and aim chiefly at brevity, rather than at elaborate 
argument upon any one department of truth, especially as 
this might not be so favorable for general reading, or make 
it so desirable for use in our schools or higher institutions 
of learning. 

I send forth this work with the hope that it may not only 
be acceptable to the general reader, but prove a welcome 
help to those who are engaged in the cause of education. 
The Index to Authors will be found of service to all who 
may wish to enter upon an extended investigation of any of 
the subjects treated upon in this book. 

CHARLES E. LORD. 

Beverly, N. J., September 1, 1869. 



CONTENTS OF NATURAL THEOLOGY. 



CHAPTER I. 

EFFICIENT CArSATIOX AND FINAL CAUSATION. 

PAGE 

\yhat is to be understood by Efficient Causation and Final Causation ? — Mind and 
Matter. — Consciousness the Instrument of the Knowledge of Immaterial Sub- 
stances. — Distinction between Matter and Mind. — Author of the Human 
Mind. — Argument of the Materialist. — Material Laws. — Sir John Herschel. — 
Theory of Gradual Development. — Physical Causation — Common Idea of 
Cause. — Cause and Existence. — Brown. — Mental Causation. — Distinction be- 
tween Person and Thing. — Necessarian and Libertarian Theories. — Xo Infi- 
nite Series of Causes. — Paley on Final Causes. — Miracles. — Atheism in Rela- 
tion to General Laws. — Bowen 19 

CHAPTER IL 

WHAT ARE MATTERS OF FACT? 

What are Matters of Fact? — Consciousness. — The Senses. — Classification of the 
Facts of Consciousness. — The Sphere of the Senses. — Why the Facts of Con- 
sciousness are investigated. — Law of Facts. — Distinction between the Facts of 
the Senses and Consciousness. — Fundamental Law of the Consciousness. — 
Jouffroy 33 

CHAPTER in. 

GENERAL LAWS OF THE EARTH AND SUN. 

Definition of a General Law. — Whewell. — Laws of Gravity. — Distribution of the 
Day and the Year. — Exactness in the Length of the Day. — The Sun. — New- 
ton. — Properties of Light. — Laws of Heat. — The Atmosphere. — Water. — Laws 
of Friction. — Stability of the Solar System. — Laplace 39 

CHAPTER IV. 

THE DEVELOPMENT THEORY. 

Vestiges of Creation — M. Miiller. — Law substituted for God in the Development 
Theory. — Derogatory to Human Nature. — Creation by Miracle. — Researches 
of Geology fatal to the Development Theory. — Agassiz. — Sedgwick. — Hitch- 
cock. — Hugh Miller 55 

CHAPTER V. 

MUTUAL ADAPTATION OF THE VEGETABLE AND ANIMAL KINGDOM. 

Vegetable Growth. — Generation of Animals. — Principles of Compensation and 
Equalization. — Buckland. — No Abortive Creation of Species. — Fitness of 
Constitution 62 



( vii ) 



viii CONTENTS OF NATUBAL THEOLOGY. 

CHAPTER VI. 

PROCESS OF GENERATION IN ANIMALS AND GERMINATION IN PLANTS. 

PAGE 

Generation a Process. — Incorrect Use of the Language Principle of Generation. — 
Elementary Cause of Animal and Vegetable Existence. — Fichte. — The Art- 
ist's Studio. — Bowen. — No Evidence of Mechanism in the First Germs of 
Vegetable and Animal Life. — Threefold Union of Mechanism, Life, and Mind 65 

CHAPTER VIL 

PROSPECTIVE CONTRIVANCES OF AJflMALS. 

Recuperative Power of the Animal Economy. — Prospective Contrivances of Ani- 
mals. — The Heron and Cormorant. — Solan Goose. — Tongue of the Wood- 
pecker. — Air-bladder of the Fish. — Fang of a Viper. — Bag of the Opossum. 
— Stomach of the Camel. — Young of Animals. — Proboscis of the Elephant. — 
The Crane. — The Spider's "Web. — The Lobster. — Gizzard of Birds. — Locomo- 
tion of Reptiles and Birds 72 

CHAPTER VIII. 

THE SENSES. 

Relationship of the Senses to the Nerves. — Adaptation of the "World without us 
to the "\Vorld within us. — The Connection of the Senses with the Mind. — Sir 
Charles Bell.— The Eye.— Dr. Dick.— The Hearing.- Seat of the Senses . 76 

CHAPTER IX. 

LIFE AND INSTINCT. 

Definition of Life by Stahl, Humboldt, Kant, Bichat, and Schmidt. — Life and Or- 
ganization. — Chemical Afl&nity and Change. — Origin of Life. — Instinct. — Its 
Distinction from Reason 81 

CHAPTER X. 

THE HITMAN BODY AND MIND, AND THE TESTIMONY OF HISTORY AND SCIENCE UPON THE 

ORIGIN OF MAN. 

Man a Complex Machine. — Regularity of the Animal Structure. — Package. — 
Beauty of the Body. — Pelling. — Testimony of History and Science upon the 
Origin of Man 86 

CHAPTER XL 

COMPARATIVE PHYSIOLOGY, AND PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY. 

Relation of the Inorganic Kingdom to the Organic. — Globules of Blood in Herba- 
ceous and Carnivorous Animals. — M. Jussieu. — George Taylor. — Agassiz. — 
Harmony existing in the Laws of Heat and Light in the Vegetable King- 
dom. — Hunt. — Chemical Composition of the Animal and Vegetable King- 
dom. — Physical Geography of the Earth 90 

CHAPTER XIL 

MEANING OF THE TERMS NATURE AND CHANCE. 

Meaning of the "Word Nature. — Original Power and Imparted Power. — No Self- 
creation. — First and Second Causes. — Fortuitous Concourse of Atoms and 
Chance unmeaning 95 



CONTENTS OF NATURAL THEOLOGY. ix 



CHAPTER Xni. 

UNITY OF DESIGN IN NATURB. 

PAGE 

Dependencies of One Part of Nature upon Another. — Collocations and Adjustments 
of Xature showing Unity of Design. — Plurality of Gods impossible. — Cuvier. 
— Unity of God shown in the Intellectual and Moral World. — No Infinite 
Series of Causes and Effects. — Pascal 99 



CHAPTER XIV. 

GENERAL HAPPINESS OP ANIMAL EXISTENCE, AND INTELLECTUAL AND SIORAL ACTION 
REVEALING TOE GOODNESS AND MERCY OF GOD. 

Happiness the Rule of Animal Existence. — Suffering the Exception. — Absolute 
Dependence upon God. — Gratuitous Nature of Divine Blessings. — Sportive 
Movements of the Young of Animals. — Physical, Mental, and Moral Happi- 
ness. — Benevolence of God. — Uniform Rule of Mental and Moral Action. — 
Variety of Pleasures springing from each. — Divine Goodness bearing the 
Impress of Mercy. — Jeremy Taylor 105 

CHAPTER XV. 

THE ESTHETIC NATURE OP MAN. 

Esthetic Nature of Man. — Elements of the Beautiful and the Sublime. — Their 
Relation to the Moral Nature. — Milton. — Developments of the Principle of 
Taste 115 



CHAPTER XVI. 

THE IMAGINATION. 

The Imagination. — External World adapted to it. — Its Existence revealing Divine 
Wisdom and Goodness. — Gray. — Early Development of the Imagination. 
— Chatterton. — Hebrew Poetry. — The Imagination degraded . . . . 120 

CHAPTER XVII. 

CONSIDERATION OP ANGER AND SHAME, THE LOVE OF AMITY, OP SOCIETY, AND THE 
POSSESSION OF PROPERTY. 

Anger instinctive and deliberate. — Under certain Relations right and useful. — 
Brown. — The Emotion of Shame. — How serviceable. — Love of Family. — The 
Support it gives to Society. — Industry, Foresight, and Kindness called by 
it into Exercise. — The Love of Possession. — Care of Society to protect the 
Rights of Property. — The Constitution of Man under all its Aspects showing 
the Workmanship of God 125 

CHAPTER XVIII. 

OMNISCIENCE, OMNIPRESENCE, AND SPIRITUALITT OP GOD. 

Omniscience and Omnipresence of God. — Our Knowledge of the Attributes of God 
derived from their Manifestation. — Dewar. — Presence of God in His Works. — 
Spirituality of God. — Matter finite. — God not circumscribed to the Sphere 
of Matter. — Not restricted by Time or Space 130 



X CONTENTS OF NATUBAL THEOLOGY. 

CHAPTER XIX. 

THE EQUITY AND BEXEVOLEXCE OF GOD SHOWN PROM THE MORAL CONSTITUTION OP MAN. 

PAGE 

The Nature of Conscience. — The Question of Happiness and Duty. — The Moral 
Constitution of Man. — The End aimed at by God in Man's Moral Constitu- 
tion. — The Peculiar Prerogative of Conscience. — Conscience uuperverted an 
Indication of the Moral Character of God. — Conscience an it 18, and as it should 
he. — Sir James Mackintosh. — Consciousness. — The Decision of Conscience. — 
Dugald Stewart. — The Relation of the Intellect to the Moral Sense. — Upham. — 
Butler. — Conscience as a Law, a Feeling, and a Judge. — The Law of Associa- 
tion. — Bowen. — Virtue. — McCosh. — Personality. — Freedom. — Pantheism. — 
"Wilson. — Self-evident Truths. — Fenelon. — Alexander. — Pascal. — The Heart 
and the Mind. — The Professed End of Human Government. — Evidence of the 
Attributes of God arising from the Moral Constitution of Man . . . 134 

CHAPTER XX. 

"the problem of physical and moral EVIL." 

Leibnitz. — The Present Universe in its Totality may have in it more Happiness 
than any other. — The Possibility of Sin necessary to Moral Freedom. — 
Lactantius. — The Infinite cannot be restricted to Actual Development. — Presi- 
dent Appleton. — The Greatest Good Virtue, not Happiness. — Pain and Death 
in the Brute Creation. — Sin, and Man's Freedom. — Suflfering essential for the 
Trial of Virtue. — Horace Bushnell 170 

CHAPTER XXL 

THE NATURAL AND THE SUPERNATURAL. 

Law not causative, but expressive. — Prof. Xichol. — The Natural the Sphere of 
Second Causes. — Regularity in Natural Law. — The End for which Nature is 
made. — Limitations of Nature. — The Supernatural. — Prof. George Fisher. — 
Tendency at the Present Day to Pantheism. — Cause of Natural and Revealed 
Religion bound up together. — Nature and its Laws do not conftict with the 
Development of the Supernatural. — The Six Great Epochs of Creation. — Prof. 
Tayler Lewis. — Miracle necessary. — The Cyclical Law of all Natures. — Ar- 
nold. — The Human and the Divine. — Constitution of Nature as to Mind and 
Matter. — The First Links in the Chain of Causation concealed. — Different 
Aspects of the Supernatural. — Polytheism. — Romanism. — Ideal, and Material- 
istic Pantheism. — Deism. — Rationalism. — Philosophy of the Intuitions and 
the Feelings. — Infidelity contrasted with Superstition. — Horace Bushnell . 184 

CHAPTER XXIL 

THE HUMAN, THE SUPERHUMAN, AND THE DIVINE. 

What is comprehended in the Human. — No Part of Man's Nature supernatural. 
— Universality of the Law of Cause and Effect in all Creatures and Things. — 
Human Volitions self-caused. — Necessity the Condition of Force in Things. 
— Freedom of Human Volitions. — Evidence of Consciousness. — Sophistry 
concealed under the Language " Strongest Motive." — The True Idea of 
Human Liberty. — The Complex Nature of Motives. — Identity of the Super- 
natural with the Divine. — The Sphere of its Activity. — The Mental Constitu- 
tion of Man. — Twofold Character of Human Freedom. — Distinction between 
the Strongest Motive and the Successful Motive. — Force in the World of Matter 
and Mind. — The Superhuman. — The Miraculous restricted to the Supernatu- 
ral. — Law as applied to the Deity. — Second Causes. — The Divine Action upon 
Things and Persons. — The Law of Causality in Things and Persons. — Dis- 
tinction between "Wonders and Miracles. — Proper Classification of the Human, 
Superhuman, and the Divine. — "What is Sin ? — Sin toward God. — Sin toward 
Man. — Necessity of the Interposition of the Divine in Human Afi'airs . . 213 



CONTENTS OF NATURAL THEOLOGY. xi 



CHAPTER XXIII. 

LIMITATIONS OP HUMAN THOUGHT. 

PAGE 

The Senses and Consciousness the Instruments of Human Thought. — Variety of 
Development in Diiferent Minds. — Original Diflferences in the Human Facul- 
ties. — Limitations of the Mind respecting Things Material and Immaterial. — 
Primary Ideas. — Essence of Soul and Body. — Objects of the External World. 
— The Accommodation of God to the Limitations of Human Thought. — Influ- 
ence of Sin in shutting out God from the Mind. — The Real Knowledge of Man 
mostly confined to Simple Facts. — Belief as related to Human Conduct. — 
Mode of the Manifestation of God to Man. — Law of Cause and Effect. — Di- 
vine Purposes and Free Agency. — The Finite and the Infinite. — The Incarna- 
tion of Christ considered simply as a Fact. — God in the Incarnation of His 
Son coming under Human Limitations. — First Cause and Second Causes. — 
Mind and Matter. — Time and Eternity. — The Absolute and the Created. — Self- 
Existence, and Existence begun. — Human Personality and Divine Person- 
ality. — Divine Government and Probation. — Punishment and Reward . . 227 

CHAPTER XXIV. 



Atheism upon the Supposition that there is no God. — It removes the Highest In- 
centive to Virtue, and the Greatest Restraint upon Vice. — It does not help to 
Usefulness in the Family Relation. — The Atheist is deprived of one great 
Source of Pleasure springing from the Recognition of an Intelligent Cause. — 
His Highest Rule of Conduct must be Human Authority. — Atheism, true or 
false, is revolting to the Conscience. — It gives to the Future nothing but 
Gloom, Uncertainty, and Doubt. — Atheism upon the Supposition that there is 
a God. — God's Existence reveals the Fact of His Government. — The Impress 
of the Divine Authority manifested in the Constitution of Man. — Divine 
Government always on the side of Virtue. — Law and Grace. — Atheism espe- 
cially seated in the Heart. — Nature and Revelation both opposed to Atheism. 
— Atheism considered under the Ills of Life. — Atheism, destitute of all Reason 
and an Enemy to the Progress of Society in Intelligence, Virtue, or Happiness. 
— It shuts the Mind up to the Present Hour. — The Atheist Code of Morals 
contrasted with Christianity. — Atheism as developed in the French Revolu- 
tion. — Its Criminality and Ruin 247 



CONTEiYrS OF REVEALED THEOLOGY, 



CHAPTER I. 

NECESSITY OP A REVELATION FROM GOD. 

PAGE 

Insufficiency of the Light of Nature.— Objections of Infidelity to the Christian 
Scheme. — The Law of Belief. — Real Question at Issue. — Probability of a Rev- 
elation from the Character of God. — Revelation necessary from the Existing 
Condition of the Conscience, and from Human Experience. — Plato, Socrates, 
Seneca, Ovid, Pliny, Clement. — What has Natural Religion accomplished? — 
Ancient and Modern Paganism. — Natural Religion unable to discover an 
Effectual Remedy for Sin. — The Voice of Conscience. — Doctrine of Revela- 
tion as to the Remedy for Sin. — Contrast existing between the Bible and all 
other Systems of Belief and Practice 261 

CHAPTER IL 

CHRIST. 

The Interval of Thirty-five Years between the Death of Christ and the Perse- 
cution of the Christians under Nero. — Testimony of Tacitus. — Jewish Ac- 
counts of Christ. — Character of Christ. — Christ as portrayed by the Four 
Evangelists. — Christ's Humanity. — Christ in what He said of Himself. — Tes- 
timony of Thomas. — Unity of Purpose in Christ's Life. — Unworldly Nature of 
Christ's Life 281 

CHAPTER IIL 

CHRIST AS A MORALIST, LEGISLATOR, REDEEMER, AND KING. 

State of Morality at Christ's Coming. — " Ecce Homo." — The Legalists and Com- 
mon People. — Morality as taught by Christ. — Teaching of Christ as to the 
Fatherhood of God, the Soul, and a Future State. — Legislation of Moses and 
Christ contrasted. — Address of Christ to the Samaritan Woman. — Motives to 
Obedience presented by Christ. — Adaptation of Christ's Legislation to the 
Success of His Cause. — The Radical Change Christ introduced into Society. — 
Christ as the Redeemer. — Necessity existing for a Vicarious Sacrifice. — The 
Incarnation. — Young. — Christ as a King. — Jewish View of the Kingship of 
Christ. — Spirituality of this Kingship. — The Tribute Money. — Christ's Mis- 
sion to the World. — Kingdom of Christ built upon Love .... 295 

CHAPTER IV. 

EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES. 

Probability of Miracles. — Necessity of Miracles at the Commencement of the 
Christian Era. — Christ's Testimony to the Value of His Miracles. — False View 
of Nature. — Redemption an End worthy of Miracles. — No Presumptive Evi- 
dence against them with this End in view. — Miraculous Interposition at Great 
Epochs of Time. — Moral Element connected with Scripture Miracles. — Mir- 
acles of the Bible contrasted with other Miracles professed to be worked. — 
Definition of a True Miracle 315 



(xii) 



CONTENTS OF REVEALED THEOLOGY. xiii 



CHAPTER V. 

MIRACLES OP CHRIST. 

PAGE 

Miracles of Moses contrasted with those of Christ. — Superiority of Christ's 
Miracles to all other Miracles. — The Age when Christ worked Miracles. — Con- 
fession of their Reality by the Pharisees, but Ascription to Beelzebub. — Mira- 
cles of Christ, unless true, must have been exposed. — How Christ's Miracles 
excelled all others : 1. Xumber. 2, Freedom and Ease. 3. Larger and more 
glorious. 4. Worked in His own Name and Power. — Trench. . . . 330 

CHAPTER VI. 

BIRTH, RESURRECTION, AND ASCEKSION OP CHRIST, AXD MIRACLES OF HIS APOSTLES. 

Circumstances connected with Christ's Advent into the "World. — Resurrection of 
Christ. — Impossibility of Deception. — Substantial Agreement of the Four 
Evangelists. — Ascension of Christ. — Peter on the Day of Pentecost. — Mir- 
acles of the Apostles 3-11 

CHAPTER VII. 

MIRACLES OP MOSES. 

The Ten Plagues of Egypt. — Idol-Worship of Egypt. — Necessity of the Mosaic 
Miracles. — Condition of the Israelites previous to the Destruction of the 
Egyptians in the Red Sea. — Forty Years' Wandering in the Desert. — Design 
of the Mosaic Miracles 34S 

CHAPTER VIII. 

EVIDENCE OP PROPHECY. 

Oracles of Delphos and Dodona. — Prophecies of the Bible contrasted with other 
Prophecies. — Fulfilled Prophecies. — The Position Prophecy holds in the 
Bible. — End secured by Prophecy. — Special Minuteness of Detail and Accu- 
racy of Fulfillment. — Prophecies respecting Babylon, Tyre, Egypt. — Three 
Sons of Noah. — Ishmael. — Abraham. — Jacob and his Twelve Sons. — Daniel. 
— Calmet. — Bishop Mcllvaine 357 

CHAPTER IX. 

PREDICTIONS CONCERNING CHRIST AND BY CHRIST. 

Minuteness of Specification in the Prophecies concerning Christ. — Daniel's Proph- 
ecy of Christ. — Zechariah's Prediction of the Thirty Pieces of Silver. — Birth- 
place of Christ designated by Micah. — Predictions of Christ by Isaiah. — 
Predictions of our Saviour in the Psalms. — Christ's Predictions of His 
Death, His Resurrection, Rapid Spread of the Gospel and Persecutions of His 
Disciples, the Precise Manner of Peter's Death, and the Destruction of Jeru- 
salem 376 

CHAPTER X. 

THE SUCCESS OF CHRISTIANITY IN THE FIRST CENTURY. 

Obstacles the Disciples had to encounter. — Method of Christ's Coming opposed to 
the Desires of the whole Jewish Nation. — Conduct of the Jews toward Christ 
and His Disciples. — Mission of the Twelve Apostles. — Condition of the World 
in the First Century of the Christian Era. — Success of the Apostles. — Testi- 
mony of Pliny, the Roman Governor. — Justin Martyr. — Gibbon. — Sincerity 
of Belief and Practice in the Early Christians 382 



xiv CONTENTS OF BEVEALED THEOLOGY. 

CHAPTER XI. 

ADAPTATION OP THE BIBLE TO HUMAN NATURE AND THE CONSCIENCE. 

PAGE 

Manner in which the Bible should be approached. — Secret Cause of Infidelity. — 
Bible adapted to Human Nature as a Key to a Lock. — Bible meets the Demands 
of the Conscience. — Sanctions imposed by the Bible on the Conscience. — How 
the Conscience is treated in the Bible, as contrasted with other Religions. — 
Bible a Guide to the Conscience. — Revealer of New Truths. — Bible meets the 
Natural Sense of Justice. — It furnishes a Perfect System of Ethics. — Cannot be 
imposed upon. — It takes no Undue Advantage of the Conscience. — Relation 
the Bible sustains to Science, History, and Physical Geography. — Bible alone 
meets the Consciousness of Guilt 391 

CHAPTER XII. 

ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE TO THE AFFECTIONS AND THE WILL. 

Popular Language of the Bible respecting the Affections. — Philosophy of the Temp- 
tation of our First Parents. — Predominance of the Sensuous Part of Man's 
Nature. — The Bible a Regulating Power over the Affections. — Bible adapted 
to the Social and Family Relation, to the Religious Sensibilities, to Seasons 
of Afiiiction and Adversity. — Adaptation of the Bible to the Will, — Intimate 
Connection of the Affections with the Will. — Motives presented to the Will 
on the side of Fear and of Hope. — The Bible a Restraining and Energizing 
Power 409 

CHAPTER XIII. 

ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE TO THE INTELLECT AND TO THE IMAGINATION. 

Relation of the Intellect to the Truth. — New Truths communicated by the Bible. — 
Number and Variety of the Books in the Bible. — Different Styles of Biblical 
Composition. — Bible reveals the best kind of Knowledge. — Adaptation of the 
Bible to the Imagination. — Stewart. — Bible a Regulating Power to the 
Imagination. — It gives Perfect Models for Imitation 419 

CHAPTER XIV. 

MORAL POWER OF CHRISTIANITY. 

Exclusive Supremacy the Bible gives to God. — Christianity a Divine Power. — 
Harmony created by it between Reason and Faith. — The Right Relation insti- 
tuted between the Sensibilities and Faith. — Alliance of the Bible with the 
Spirit of God 430 

CHAPTER XV. 

THE HARMONY OF SCIENCE AND REVELATION. 

The Value of a True Interpretation of the Bible. — What constitutes the Great End 
of Revelation. — Universal and Undeviating Uniformity of Belief upon all the 
Minutise of the Bible impossible. — Distinction between the Essential and the 
Unessential. — The Use of Popular Language in the Bible. — No Opposition 
between Right Science and Revelation. — The Four Fundamental Truths of 
Geology. — The Mosaic Narrative of the Six Days' Creation. — E. B. Pusey. — 
Dr. Buckland. — Chalmers. — Nichol. — Gaussen. — President Green . . 438 



CONTENTS OF REVEALED THEOLOGY. xv 

CHAPTER XVI. 

THE UNITY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 

PAGE 

Earliest Accounts point to the First Period of Human Existence as innocent and 
happy. — Paul's Mission to the Athenians. — Central Region of Asia the Cradle 
of the Human Race. — No Greater Varieties in the Human Species than in the 
Species of Animals. — The Two Great Laws of Species. — Origin of the Human 
Family from Adam. — Superfluity of Miracles connected with many Distinct 
Creations of Animals and Men. — DiflFercnce between Diversity and Mon- 
strosity. — Testimony of History. — Miraculous Interposition in Combination 
with Natural Law. — Layard. — Confusion of Tongues at Babel . . . 454 

CHAPTER XVIL 

INTEGRITY OP THE SACRED CANON. 

Age of the Apostles. — Testimony of Clement, Hermas, Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin 
Martyr, Irenoeus, Clement of Alexandria. TertuUian, Jerome, and Augustine. — 
Indirect Testimony of the Enemies of Christianity, Celsus, Porphyry, Julian. 
— Canon of the Old Testament indorsed by Christ. — Testimony of the New 
Testament and Jewish Writers. — Josephus. — Early Christian Fathers. — Prof. 
Sampson 477 

CHAPTER XVIIL 

THE PLENARY INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE. 

Distinction between General and Plenary Inspiration. — Divine and Human Element 
in the Bible. — Plenary Inspiration regards the Condition of the Writing rather 
than the Mind of the Writer. — AVhat is not meant by plenary inspiration. — 
Three Forms of Error into which the Mind falls in respect to the Plenary 
Inspiration of the Bible. — What constitutes a Proof of Plenary Inspiration. — 
Consideration of Objections to Plenary Inspiration. — Testimony of Sacred 
Writers of the Old and New Testaments. — Separate Chains of Evidence upon 
which the Inspiration of the Bible rests 487 

CHAPTER XIX. 

HISTORIC OUTLINE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 

Old Testament in its Revelation of God. — Mosaic Dispensation. — Contrast 
between the Theism of the Bible and the Pagan Polytheism. — Cudworth. — 
Deification of the Creature in Ancient Polytheism. — Alliance of Church and 
State. — Paul's Picture of Heathenism. — Design of the Jewish Theocracy and 
Jewish Ritual. — Principles of the Hebrew Polity 511 

CHAPTER XX. 

HISTORIC OUTLINE OP THE NEW TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 

The Dream of Nebuchadnezzar. — Christianity. — Its Relation to the World. — Its 
Ultimate Condition. — Croly. — Christianity and Paganism. — Antagonism of 
Christianity to the World. — Relation sustained to the Individual and to 
Society.— GilfilUn 526 



xvi CONTENTS OF REVEALED THEOLOGY. 



CHAPTER XXL 

THE DIPFICPLTIES OF SKEPTICISM. 

PAGE 

The Bible a Religion of Facts. — Relation of the Bible to Human Reason. — In- 
fallibility of Revelation. — The two great Errors of Skepticism. — Difficulties 
of Skepticism: 1. Degradation of Reason in its Sphere. 2. Makes no Pro- 
vision for the Highest Want of the Nature. 3. Stumbles upon the Incompre- 
hensible alike of Nature and of Revelation. 4. Removes the best Standard 
of Virtue. 5. Has no Unity of Belief 537 



CHAPTER XXII. 

THE UNREASONABLENESS OP SKEPTICISM. 

Skepticism cannot improve upon the Morality of the Bible. — Objections of the 
Skeptic frivolous and inconsistent. — The Skeptic cannot prove any of the 
Facts of the Bible untrue. — Twofold Class of Facts in the Bible, both mutually 
sustaining each other. — Skepticism a System of Doubt, and not oi Evidence . 546 

INDEX TO AUTHORS ... 555 



NATURAL THEOLOGY, 

2 



NATURAL THEOLOGY 



CHAPTER I. 

EFFICIENT CAUSATION, AND FINAL CAUSATION. 

The reasoning from effect to cause has two leading divi- 
sions : — first, that kind of argument which is based upon 
efficient causation; secondly, that which is based upon final 
causation. Efiicient causation is where the efiect or result 
is of such a nature that w^e can attribute it in no sense to any 
other being than the First Cause, or God. Final causation 
is reasoning from the character of the efiect, or result, to God. 
The former rests upon the proof that such is the efiect, or 
result, that we know of no other cause but the First Cause, 
or God. We cannot suppose any intermediate, or what is 
called secondary, cause. The latter relies for the proof of 
God upon the design, adaptation, or intelligence display eiL- 
in the efiect or result. The one reasons from nature directly 
up to nature's God, or from effects otherwise inexplicable to 
the First Cause that solves all difficulties ; the other relies 
upon the character of those efiects to show an infinitely 
intellio^ent and desis^nino^ cause. 

'We classify all things under two great divisions, mind and 
matter. One has thought, perception, sensibility to f^motions 
of joy or grief, pleasure or pain, love or hatred, and, above 
all, the great attribute of will, or instinct, which decides all 
action or controls all conduct. The other substance we call 
matter, which has length and breadth, form and divisibility. 
All matter that comes under the inspection of the senses 
has also color and weight. The great instrument by which 
we attain to the knowledge of immaterial substances is pecu- 

(19) 



20 EFFICIENT CAUSATION, 

liarlj the consciousness; while the senses bring us directly 
into contact with matter, and afford us a certain knowledge 
of it. Observe, then, that man, compounded of two directly 
opposite substances, perfectly distinct from each other, yet 
linked together by the mysterious cord of animal life, comes 
for the first time into existence. What brought man thus 
compounded into being? What introduced the first man 
into the world? What combined together two substances 
so foreign from each other ? Let us suppose, with the atheist, 
that some peculiar modification of matter brought him into 
being, some fortunate position of particles, some wx)nderful 
combination of atoms under the mysterious agency of chemi- 
cal or mechanical law. Incredible as this is, let us, for argu- 
ment's sake, admit it. But what are we to do with the mind 
of man? How came that into being? Is it not an axiom 
that no substance can impart that which it has not? Matter 
is not mind, — how can it give it ? Material atoms have not 
thought, Avill, perception, and feeling. We do not attach 
the ideas of weight, color, length and breadth, form and 
divisibility, to mind ; and yet that which has not intelligence, 
which has none of the properties of mind, did produce 
thought, and, more than all, impart a moral nature, a sense 
of accountability and of free agency ! Are we not intuitively 
struck with the absurdity of such a supposition ? Even if 
matter had in itself an efficient power of producing, without a 
First Cause, every modification of matter and every diversit}^ 
of mechanism, yet it cannot produce mind; it cannot be the 
architect of thought, will, perception, a moral sense, or free 
agency. Who can conceive of matter engendering, by its own 
inherent power, the conscience, the perception, and feeling of 
right and wrong? If one infinite mind was not the author 
of the human mind, then the conclusion must be that mind 
owed its parentage to matter, to a substance w^hose exclusive 
properties are extension, weight, form, divisibility, and color. 
Before the atheist can give the least plausibility to his 
theories, he must deny the existence of spirit, and of all 
things immaterial. 

Let us, then, see if, upon the theory of the atheistic mate- 



AXD FINAL CAUSA TIOX. 21 

rialist, there is any virtue in the argument that matter was 
the sole cause of the human body. Imagine, now, that 
thought, feeling, will, perception, and reason are only refined 
modifications of matter ; simply the subtile phenomena of 
materialism. What is the question to be solved ? Simply 
tliis : can any or all of the known or supposed laws of matter 
account for the origin of the human body and mind? ^lost 
certainly not. Material laws are simply the mode, under wliich 
material phenomena develop themselves. Thus, we have 
the general law of gravity, or attraction; mechanical law, 
which relates to position and direction ; chemical law, which 
relates to affinity and combination. Here are material atoms, 
or inorganic particles. Can we imagine any juxtaposition, 
or combination, or attraction of atoms to come together and 
form the mysterious framework of the human system ? Re- 
member, we cannot ascribe intelligence to atoms of inorganic 
matter : we give to them their appropriate laws ; but do they 
or can they produce the human organism? Who can con- 
ceive of blind, unconscious particles of matter jostling to- 
gether a human frame,' bone, muscle, heart, blood, veins, 
arteries, hands, eyes, ears, feet, and all in one harmonious 
system, all in due proportion, with no superabundance and 
no defect? We must disown our own consciousness and 
the first principles of reason, before we can harbor sueli 
a thought. Remember, we have inorganic particles to 
produce a perfect, living organism. Denying an infinite 
intelligence to fashion the bod}-, our only resort is unintelli- 
gent atoms. By the law of gravity we suppose w^orlds are 
kept in motion, and matter is attracted to matter; by me- 
chanic3.1 law we give position and direction to difl^erent sub- 
stances ; by chemical law^ we secure affinity, and the intimate 
combination of elements together. But can one or all of 
these laws of inorganic substances account for the living body 
of man ? I*To. We trace their operation out, and we find 
they have their own peculiar sphere. [N^either moving worlds 
nor moving atoms can engender living bodies, i^o chemical 
law can give birth to the lowest organism. The sphere of 
chemical law is as distinct from the vital principle of living 



22 EFFICIENT CAUSATION, 

organisms as the act of volition from a stone. The first man 
is an effect, a result of something; but that something cannot 
be floating atoms of matter, or any conceivable mechanical, 
chemical, or gravitating law. We cannot with sane minds 
believe in what we never have seen done nor can show can 
be done. Thus, whether w^e conceive of man as only mate- 
rial, or both material and immaterial, we know that no law 
of gravity, no mechanical force, and no chemical afiinity can 
be a sufficient reason, or any reason whatever, for the living 
organism. We know that no jumbling together of atoms, no 
chance combination of particles, no blind floating of lifeless 
substances could engender the human system. But more 
than this, — we know that the principle that gives vitality to 
the living body of man is constantly at war with the laws of 
inorganic substances. Man only lives by holding in inces- 
sant check those inorganic laws that rapidly, when tliey have 
the mastery, reduce the system to the dust of the ground. 
Who has not noticed how soon, when the vital laws suspend 
their action, the body decomposes? The wear of the 
elements, the friction of the human machinery, the agency 
of chemical affinities, all combine to destroy the human body. 
But the vital law of all livim^ orc^anisms holds all other laws 
in abeyance; but when death comes, and the principle of 
vitality no longer exists, then these inorganic laws reduce to 
dust the human frame. How great, then, the absurdity of 
attributing to any inorganic law, or all combined, the living 
body of man! We then come to the conclusion that, if man' 
has had a beginning, we can find no cause for it in nature: 
we must flnd that cause in God. 

"Without going into any subtilities," says Sir John Her- 
schel, "I may at least be allowed to suggest that it is at least 
high time that philosophers, both physical and others, should 
come to some nearer agreement than seems to prevail as to 
the meaning they intend to convey in speaking of causes and 
causation. On the one hand, we are told that the grand ob- 
ject of physical inquiry is to explain the nature of phenomena 
by referring them to the causes ; on the other, that the in- 
quiry into causes is altogether vain and futile, and that 



AXD FIXAL CAUSATIOX. 23 

science has no concern but with the discovery of hiws. 
Which of them is the truth? Or are both views of the 
matter true on a different interpretation of the terms ? 
Whichever view we may take, or whichever interpretation 
we may adopt, there is one thing certain — the extreme in- 
convenience of such a state of lano-uas^e. This can onlv be 
reformed bj^ a careful analysis of the widest of all human 
generalizations, disentangling from one another the innu- 
merable shades of meaning which have got confounded 
together in its progress, and establishing among them a 
rational classification and nomenclature. Until this be done, 
we cannot be sure that by the relation of cause and effect 
one and the same kind of relation is understood." 

The half-atheistic theory of gradual development to ac- 
count for the commencement of the human race, is as much 
opposed to true science as it is to the express declarations of 
Scripture. Consequently we are shut up to the only possi- 
ble alternative to account for the origin of man, even the 
direct and miraculous power of God. But the form of argu- 
ment to prove the existence of God the most impressive, is 
that founded upon design and adaptation. This comes more 
properh' under the name of final causation. But if the 
argument of final causation is more impressive, and of far 
wider application, it may be doubted if it is as direct and 
positive as the argument of efiicient causation. The atheis- 
tical mind will often confound the reasonino; of desis^n and 
adaptation to prove the existence of God with the operation 
of natural law. Under the vas^ue lano^uao;e of laws of nature 
there will be lost all true ideas of a personal God, and thus 
these very evidences of contrivance and adaptation, that 
should lead directly to the great First Cause, are perverted 
b}' the wrong use of laws of nature. When the theist, filled 
with admiration in the contemplation of a wonder-working 
God, would point to the diversified evidences of design, the 
skeptic shuts out the conviction of God from his mind by 
worshiping law in his place. Consequently to give the 
highest logical accuracy as directness to the argument for a 
God, it is necessary to go back to the commencement of the 



24 EFFICIENT CAUSATION, 

human race, and of the varied species of animate creation, 
when the great law of production, or the generation of ani- 
mals, had no existence. Here we say to the skeptic, Much 
as you may defy law, you cannot bring in law to account for 
the origin of man, and quadrupeds, reptiles, birds, and the 
fishy tribes. Before these living creatures had an existence, 
where was the law of reproduction? Where was the law of 
propagating species before species had any being? To speak 
of the animate world before its existence is the greatest of 
absurdities. It is the same as to say, there is a uniform mode 
or principle of reproduction, of growth, and life, before even 
generation, growth, and life had an existence. Thus, imme- 
diately when we come to the first links of each chain that 
represents the different species of animals, we are compelled 
to have recourse to an infinitely intelligent and powerful 
being as their sole and only adequate cause. The laws of 
nature in respect to animals can have no actual existence 
until the difi^erent species of animals are created. By con- 
founding cause and effect with the general phenomena of the 
law of production, the author of the "Vestiges of Creation" 
fell into the blunder of gradual development. He did not 
consider that the human mind, dissatisfied with the vague 
abstraction of general law, demanded something better to 
account for the origin of man and the different species of 
animals. So also Spinoza, by making no distinction between 
physical causation and mental causation, between material 
and immaterial substances, the laws of body and the laws of 
thought and will, constructed a theory whose iron fatalism 
destroyed alike all virtue and all freedom, — a theory where 
God becomes nature, and both are bound together with the 
chain of an irresistible necessity. So Hume, by overlooking 
the distinction of substances and their properties or modes 
of action, — mental causation and mental effects, — overturned 
the certainty of all human knowledge, and introduced a 
state of unlimited doubt. The pantheism of Spinoza was 
fatalism; the skepticism of Hume, endless uncertainty. So 
also the atheist, by making cause and existence identical, 
and giving too wide a meaning to the axiom of cause and 



AND FIXAL CAUSATION. 25 

effect, reduces the theist to the alternative of admitting 
either that God had a cause, or that the earth was uncaused. 
Consequently we see how necessary is correct reasoning 
upon cause and effect. The argument from design, as well 
as that from efficient causation, is deeply affected by a cor- 
rect understanding of cause and effect, of laws mental and 
material, and what are matters of fact in distinction from 
the abstract relation of ideas. 

What is the common idea of cause with all persons univer- 
sally? Is it not that which produces effects? Is not effi- 
cienc}^ or power of some sort, always included in the idea of 
a cause? A cause, then, is a substance, material or mental, 
that produces effects. Can we have the idea of cause and 
not also of effect with it? Is not effect the necessary and 
invariable consequent of cause? Take away the idea of effect 
from cause, and can we have any idea of cause? Certainly 
not. A cause is that which causes, produces, or influences. 
Cause, therefore, must with it comprehend power. Can 
there be an effect and no power to produce it? Impossible! 
For what is an effect unless it implies the result of action, 
or change of some sort ? If the idea of power could be sepa- 
rated from cause, then we could separate cause and effect; 
for if cause has no power, then effect has no cause, for all 
action, motion, or change must imply a power to produce 
such action, motion, or change. We can na more divorce 
power from cause than we can cause from effect. But in 
what sense does cause imply power? Exclusively in the 
sense of power in action, for cause and power passive, or not 
put forth, is a contradiction in terms. This is our first idea 
of cause. What is our second idea of cause? It is, that 
cause not only includes power in action, but substance for 
existence. We know of only two perfectl}' distinct kinds 
of substances: one we call mind, the other body; one is 
spiritual, the other material. When we speak of causes in 
the world of matter, we mean physical causes; in the world 
of mind, mental or spiritual causes; and both include the 
two fundamental ideas of power and substance. We come, 
then, to consider if cause and existence are identical propo- 



26 EFFICIENT CAUSATION, 

sitions, or synonymous terms. Existence and substance are 
identical, for there can be no substance without existence, 
and no existence without substance. We cannot speak of 
nothing existing, except as a figure of speech. We can have 
no idea of existence divorced from substance, and its proper- 
ties divorced from existence. But is existence in the same 
manner identical with cause ? Can existence never be spoken 
of without the idea of cause ? Upon a correct solution of this 
question depends essentially the strength of the argument for 
the existence of God. It has been seen that cause is always 
that which produces; that it always includes power in action 
of some sort : not power passive, but powder leading to 
effects, movements, or changes. Now, do we not often have 
the idea of substance passive in a quiescent state, not acting? 
Certainly no idea is more uniformly familiar to the mind; 
but substance is synon^mious with existence : then of course 
there can be the idea of existence without action, or causa- 
tion. While a cause uniformly implies existence, existence 
does not uniformly imply a cause. One is general, the other 
specific. One always comprehends substance, the other sub- 
stance in action. Thus we come to the conclusion that, while 
cause always implies substance, energizing or producing 
effects, existence may or may not include substance, ener- 
gizing or causing effects ; and therefore that it is stretching 
the axiom too far to say that because every effect must have 
a cause, therefore all substance or existence must have a 
cause. The atheist, misusing this axiom, tells us that since 
every effect must have a cause, and every cause a substance, 
therefore there is an endless series of causes and effects, and 
consequently that God himself has a cause, and therefore 
there is no First Cause. If the mind, revolting from such a 
conclusion, denies the axiom that every effect must have a 
cause, then the atheist turns to this earth, and asks if the 
world itself is not uncaused and existing from eternity, since 
there are some effects without a cause. How is the theist to 
extricate himself from this dilemma ? Simply by showing that 
the axiom, that every effect must have a cause, is restricted 
exclusively to substances energizing, or producing effects; 



AND FINAL CAUSATION 27 

that it has relation to j^oiver in action, not passi^'e 'power; to an 
existence that produces changes, not an existence not caused. 
Thus, viewing substance without movement, change, or ac- 
tion, with no previous knowledge of that substance or how 
it came into existence, we cannot say that it had a cause ; but 
no sooner do we see power operating in change or movement 
than we say at once there is an effect, and therefore a cause. 
Is it not, then, admitted that existence does not necessarily 
or inevitably impl}^ a cause ? Then God, who is an ex- 
istence, is not an effect from a pre-existing cause. God is 
uncaused, self-existing, the great First Cause and effect. 
From within himself there is a sufficient cause for all his 
works. In his own nature, not out of it, there dwells the 
mighty fountain of cause and effect. In himself reside in- 
finite knowledge and power. Thus, by limiting a general 
axiom to its peculiar sphere, do we disentangle our minds of 
that web of sophistry that leads to fatalism and the denial of 
a personal, uncaused God. " Matter, as an unformed mass," 
says Brown, " could not, of itself, have suggested the notion 
of a Creator, since in every hypothesis something material or 
mental must have existed uncaused, and mere existence, 
therefore, is not necessarily a mark of previous causation, 
unless we take for o^ranted an infinite series of causes." 

Let us examine the distinction between physical causes 
and mental, causes, and get the essential idea of the two. 
When we speak of causes in the w^orld of matter, what do we 
mean ? Do we mean that simple uncompounded substances, or 
substances apart from other substances, can produce effects ? 
Then matter is not essentially passive ; like volition, it is self- 
active : certainh^ this is not meant by physical causation. We 
mean by physical causation the relation of cause and effect 
under certain prescribed conditions. Thus, there must be 
two or more substances to produce effects, and then a certain 
relation of those substances to each other. In other words, 
cause and effect can only exist in physical substances when 
there is more than one substance, and then under a certain 
prescribed order or law, or relation of these substances to 
each other. We must combin<^ the two, or there is no effect. 



28 EFFICIENT CAUSATION, 

We can clissoh^ salt in water, but not 2:lass. We can mino-le 
together milk and water, but not oil and water. Thus, we 
see in all material substances mechanical laws and chemical 
laws, and to produce effects there must be two or more sub- 
stances, and then a right adjustment of those substances. 
Consequently all action in matter comes from without ; all 
effects are ab extra. Matter itself is passive, and must be 
moved upon. Alone it never changes, never moves, never 
acts. We do not discuss the nature of second causes, but 
simply their mode of manifestation. We do not define the 
phenomena of physical causes, but exhibit them as they ap- 
pear to all minds. Matter itself is essentially passive. All 
effect, all action, is from without, not within; therefore 
matter has no intelligence, no freedom, no accountability. 
What, now, is mental causation? Mental causes differ as 
widely from physical causes as the mind itself from matter. 
The mind is a unit, a person, a substance indivisible, endowed 
with will, which is self active. Self is the invariable attendant 
upon mind, a simple, pure idea of consciousness, self evident 
and intuitive. Thus, the idea of person, and that of self, go 
together. Every volition of mind, every perception of the 
sense?, every feeling of the heart, every emotion of sensibility, 
carries with it the consciousness of self, of a person, of me, a 
free agent. Thus, we see a wide distinction between person 
and thing : a person is individual ; a thing, general ; a person 
is unity; a thing, complexity. One is indivisible, the other 
divisible ; one self-active, the other acted upon ; one embodies 
essential freedom, the other uniform necessity. A thing pro- 
duces effects from without; a person, from within. One is 
caused, the other self caused. One is irresponsible, the other 
accountable. Thus, a person has a kingly will, free to act right 
and wrong, moving within itself, mnking tributary to it as 
instruments the diversified objects of sense; but a thing is 
irresistibly bound to the law of necessity; it cannot act ex- 
cept in connection with another substance, and then only in 
accordance with some invariable law of order or proportion : 
doubly enchained in itself, it is essentially passive. Thus 
we see how different are the causes of the physical and of the 



AND FINAL CAUSATION, 29 

material world, — liow unlike are each in their action. Here 
it is,' by compounding mental causes and physical causes 
together, we see the error of the extreme necessarians, and 
by overlooking physical causes, or the great law of cause and 
effect, in mind as in matter, we see the difficulties of the ex- 
treme libertarians. The former, by a mode of reasoning- 
adapted only to physical causes, make even the will forced, 
and a compulsory state of the volitions, thus virtually leading 
to the ruin of all true liberty; while the latter, denying 
cause and effect in the mental world in relation to the will, 
not only war against the clearest axiom of consciousness, but 
remove away all certainty of human action, all foundation 
for character, and the only principle by which we can possibly 
judge of human or divine conduct. If there is no great law 
of causality in the mental w^orld, then consciousness and the 
senses falsify their trust ; liberty even ceases to be true 
liberty, and becomes a variable, lawless liberty, where un- 
limited fickleness marks all character, and eternal uncertainty 
all action. The laws of the mental world cease to have any 
meaning, and endless doubt rests upon every anticipation of 
human or divine volition. But it is equally hazardous not to 
draw the line of separation heaven-wide between physical 
and mental causes. If we borrow our reasoning upon mental 
causes from any physical analogy, we are inevitably forced 
over the precipice of a relentless necessity. We may cover 
up our language with ever so many smooth names, but we 
shall be compelled either to contradict over and over again 
ourselves, or, if consistent, tliere can be no alternative but the 
fatalism of Ficlite or Spinoza. We are not safe for a moment 
if we lose the idea that the mind acts from witbin, while the 
bod}' from without ; that in the will cause and effect are ab 
intra, while in matter ab extra; the one self-active, the other 
acted upon. The only idea of power with mind is internal, 
while with the body it is external. Consequently physical 
and mental causation are distinct altogether. !N'ot more wide 
apart is the substance of matter from mind, than is the law of 
causality that reigns in both. Let the necessarian purge his 
mind of physical causes when he enters the mysterious 



30 EFFICIEXT CAUSATION, 

temple of human thought and volition. Let him disentangle 
himself of the ambio'uous reasonino- about the strono:est mo- 
tive. It is the man that determines the motive, vastly more 
than the motive the man. And let the extreme libertarian 
remember that the law of causality exists in the world of 
matter and of mind; that in the mind it exists in perfect 
consistency with human freedom; that consciousness and the 
senses confirm this law, and that without it all things would 
be afloat, even as they would be did it not exist in the mate- 
rial world. Having now considered the distinction between 
physical and mental causes, let the person who would lose 
sight of God in second causes, or deny them, consider the 
language of Lord Bacon : 

" For certain it is that God worketh nothing in nature but 
by second causes; and if they would have it otherwise be- 
lieved, it is by mere imposture, as it were in favor toward 
God and nothing else, but to offer to the author of truth the 
unclean sacrifice of a lie. But further, it is an absurd truth, 
and a conclusion of experience, that a little or superficial 
knowledge of philosophy may incline the man to atheism; 
but a further proceeding therein doth bring the mind back 
again to religion ; for in the entrance of philosoph}^ when 
the second causes, which are next unto the senses, do offer 
themselves to the mind of man, if it dwell and stay, then it 
may include some oblivion of the highest cause; but when a 
man passeth on farther and seeth the dependence of causes 
and the works of Providence, then, according to the allegory 
of the poets, he will easih^ believe that the highest link 
of nature's chain must needs be tied to the foot of Jupiter's 
chair." 

It has therefore been seen that God could not have a prior 
cause, because existence does not necessarily imply a cause; 
because, when we trace back ever so far cause and effect, we 
reach at last the first cause, and the only sufficient cause; 
and that there we must stop, because in God cause and effect 
are self-existing, and that consequently there can be no infi- 
nite series of causes. Here we feel that the existence of God 
is placed upon an immovable foundation. When then we come 



AND FINAL CAUSATION. 31 

to reason upon final causes, the adjustment of general laws, the 
adaptation of means to an end, and all the evidences of design 
shown in the works of nature, we can see far more clearly 
than before the varied and wonderful proofs of the being of 
God; we extricate ourselves from all the sophistry disguised 
under the unmeaning language of laws of nature, and that 
pantheism that confounds God and nature together; but 
especially do we relieve ourselves of the metaphysical sub- 
tilities comprehended in an infinite series of causes directly 
leading to the deification of the powers of nature, and the 
denial of all true freedom of will. 

Unsurpassed as is the reasoning of Paley upon the evi- 
dences of contrivance in nature, and the clearness of all his 
proofs of intelligence in the construction of the world, yet 
his admirable work upon final causes and design evinced in 
this world cannot clearly combat the profound subtility of 
German infidelity, and all the atheistical sophistry disguised 
under the language of laws of nature and an infinite series 
of causes. To give the highest efiect to all reasoning upon 
final causes, it is very important to show eflicient causation 
in the works of nature from God, when in no sense general 
law in respect to that causation could have an existence. 
Thus removed from the sphere of law, eflicient causation 
leads directly, without any intermediate agency, to the First 
Cause. God, then, being clearly demonstrated by the most 
convincing induction, all other proofs from final causes, from 
the laws of nature, or the adaptation of means to an end, 
come clothed with far greater power to the mind. This is 
easily seen when there is the direct suspension of some law 
of nature, as in the case of miracles. How irresistibly is 
the mind led to the acknowledgment of God! How strik- 
ing, how direct is the proof of divine agency ! Should some 
man, as in the time of Christ, be raised from the dead, or 
walk, as our Saviour did, upon the waves of the sea, how 
convincing would be the immediate power of God! Thus 
the mind that so unreasonably confounds God with nature, 
and the Deity with his laws, is forced, however reluctant, to 
confess the being of God. Because efiacient causation in 



32 EFFICIENT CAUSATION, AND FINAL CAUSATION 

the origin of man and the brutes partakes so clearly of the 
character of miracle, where no known law and no second 
causes have any existence, we see how irresistibly the 
atheism embodied in the wrong idea of general laws of an 
infinite series of causes is swept away. We see how plainly 
an infinite God is seated upon the throne of the universe, 
revealing himself directly in creation and all miracles, and 
indirectly, but no less certainly, in the phenomena of general 
laws, their adjustment together, and the adaptation of means 
to an end. 

"It is no doubtful inference," says Francis Bowen, "no 
long and tedious process of reasoning, which connects all 
events in the history of the universe with the being and 
attributes of God. The conclusion is so obvious, the con- 
nection so close and striking, that it is diflicult to believe 
that any mind not willfully obtuse, and not perverted by 
logical subtilities and metaphysical abstractions, ever failed 
to conceive it with perfect trust at first sight." 



CHAPTEE II. 

WHAT ARE MATTERS OF FACT? 

Matters of fact may be distinguished into things which 
exist and events which take phace. Thus the earth is a 
matter of fact, and its movement is equally so. 

What are matters of fact ? 

All material things, and all events in connection with 
them, must be classed among matters of fact. But the ques- 
tion is, Are matters of fact exclusively confined to objects 
of sense and their changes, or can matters of fact have a 
wider range? Are those things which we see, handle, touch, 
hear, or taste, with their changes, alone matters of fact; or 
may there not exist other matters of fact, entirely distinct 
from the world of visible things, that cannot come under the 
cognizance of any of our senses ? If so, then the instrument 
by which we attain unto a knowledge of these matters of fact 
must be altogether different from the senses. Is there such 
an instrument? Certainly ; in consciousness is found the 
instrument, as real in its operation and clear in the knowl- 
edge it imparts, as is seen in the agency of the senses. 

What is the consciousness? 

The consciousness is that which directly gives the knowl- 
edge of the volitions of the mind and all the desires of the 
heart. Is not an act of will a matter of fact? Is not to us 
the certainty of our volitions as great as the certainty of the 
earth we tread upon? Does any person doubt whether he 
wills to do this or that thing ? Does he doubt whether he 
feels pleasure or pain? Is the mind less certain of the feel- 
ing of sorrow or joy, of hatred or love, of confidence or dis- 
trust, than of the stars that sparkle in the sky, or the flower 
that adorns the field ? But the acts of the volition, or feeling, 
cannot come under the cognizance of the senses. The anato- 

3 (33) 



34 WHAT ARE MATTERS OF FACT? 

mist, with his knife and miscroscope, may dissect the body, 
and view the minute wonders of the human frame ; but can 
his microscope and knife avail him in dissecting the vastly 
more mysterious mechanism of thought and feeling? Ko. 
This belongs to the domain of psychology, not physiology. 
The instrument by which we analyze the former is conscious- 
ness, the latter the senses. It is in making the senses com- 
prise all matters of fact ^ and confounding all the facts of con- 
sciousness with simply the relation of ideas ^ as that the three 
angles of a triangle are equal to two right angles, or the 
whole is greater than a part, that the mind is led to depre- 
ciate the commonest and clearest facts of our being. But are 
the facts of the consciousness equally clear? Certainly not. 
No more than are all the facts of the senses. The naturalist, 
in observing the phenomena of nature, varies in degree of 
certainty. In his scale of facts there is a belief based upon 
the highest certainty, and a belief less sure, ranging down 
even to the lowest probability. To arrive at certainty the 
senses must have ample opportunity for observation ; they 
must not be limited in respect to their exercise, but must 
have ample field for operation. Much is said of the decep- 
tion of the senses; but the senses, properly understood, never 
deceive. The senses only promise a true decision when 
suitably used. If but partially used, if but limited in their 
legitimate sphere, their decision must correspond to the 
character of their exercise; precisely the same is it with the 
consciousness. The consciousness, properly understood, never 
can deceive; but then it must have a fair field for its exer- 
cise. There are innumerable facts of consciousness, ranging 
from those which all believe in to the more obscure and less 
defined. But what is the remedj^ for a true classification of 
the facts of consciousness ? Just the same which the natu- 
ralist resorts to in the true classification of the facts of the 
senses — careful observation. The instrument of the conscious- 
ness must be used with as much discrimination as that of the 
senses. But here consists the difi:erence. The senses have 
to do with that ivithout us; while the consciousness is limited 
exclusively to that within us. We cannot run after the facts 



WHAT ARE MATTERS OF FACT? 35 

of the consciousness; they must be observed at the same 
time they appear in the consciousness. The mind must be 
abstracted from the external world, must retire within itself, 
and ponder upon those facts that constantl}^ present them- 
selves in the soul. Self- demonstration to us will be the 
highest demonstration. It will be proof as great as an}- de- 
rived from the observation of the senses. But more than 
this: the fiicts of consciousness exist with all; for the facts 
of the senses we go abroad; but the facts of the conscious- 
ness are foulid at home. It will not do to form a system, and 
bend the facts of consciousness to that system. It will not 
•do to theorize: we must observe. Like the naturalist, we 
must content ourselves with ascertaining facts, not building 
systems. Our minds must be limited to strict observation 
of facts, and then induction from facts. B}' this way all the 
leading facts of consciousness will be distinctly recognized, 
and perfect agreement will exist ; because there will be the 
same self-demonstration with all of the same facts. But if, 
instead of careful observation of facts, and deductions from 
facts, the mind abandons itself to system-building, it will fall 
into errors equally as pernicious as those errors that existed 
in physics before the Baconian principle of induction took 
the place of the old philosophy of ages of ignorance and 
presumption. From units we must go to universals, and 
not from universals to units. Having seen that the phe- 
nomena of the intelligence, the sensibility, and the will are 
facts as real as the phenomena of the external world, we are 
prepared to answer the question. For what purpose do we 
investigate the facts of consciousness? Let us confine our- 
selves to the facts of consciousness universally' admitted. 
Who doubts that he wills, or thinks, or feels? Who is 
there that is not persuaded of his acts of volition? Who 
does not believe as certainly in his thoughts and feelings as 
in any of the phenomena of the external world? But by 
what instrument is it that he knows that he feels, wills, or 
thinks? Simply the consciousness. Certainty in these facts 
is as absolute as certainty in any of the facts of the senses, 
and man must be annihilated before he loses his belief in 



36 WHAT ARE MATTERS OF FACT? 

thought, feeling, and will. It is as impossible to doubt these 
facts as that of the existence of an external world. Why, 
then, do we examine matters of fact, be they of the senses or 
of the consciousness? The reply is. To find out the laio^ the 
principle of order that reigns supreme in all matters of fact. 
To what purpose to us w^ould it be to have a collection of 
facts, be they of the senses or of the consciousness, if we 
could not find out the law of facts, if order was unknown, 
and if by induction we should be unable to ascertain the 
laws that link together every separate class of facts. 

What, then, is meant by the law of facts? Simply the 
uniform relation of antecedent and consequent. For in-- 
stance, " fire burns the hand." The induction is that always 
it will burn the hand. "A weight falls to the ground." 
The induction is that invariably, under like circumstances, 
heavy bodies will ftall to the ground. "Oil mixed with water 
rises to the top." The induction is that water and oil will 
not mingle together. Thus, in the observation of the facts 
of the external world, we study the laws of those facts; we 
examine into the invariable relation of antecedent and con- 
sequent. Is it not the same with the facts of consciousness? 
Are there no laws except what relate to the sphere of the 
senses? Do not the facts of consciousness have their own 
peculiar laws adapted to their own mental and normal state? 
Is it not the law of the will to lead to action ? — of the sensi- 
bility to awaken emotion and to influence the will? — of the 
intelligence to secure knowledge? We come, then, to the 
conclusion that internal phenomena, that the facts of the 
senses and consciousness are entirely distinct; that we can- 
not bring the senses to analyze the consciousness, or the 
consciousness the senses. Each have their separate sphere. 
The one has to do alone with the world without us, while 
the other is exclusivel}^ confined to the world within us. We 
come, then, to the conclusion that the universal law of every 
phenomenon, whether of the senses or of the consciousness, 
is founded upon an inherent principle of the mind: the 
relation of antecedent and consequent, cause and effect. 
The sufficient reason is not so much seen to be as known to 
be. It is a pure conception of reason. A first truth, an ab- 



WHAT ABE MATTERS OF FACT? 37 

solute necessity of the very construction of the mind. The 
simple uncompounclecl ideas cannot be defined. Thus the 
knowledge of our identity, of our self-existence, the fact 
that I exist, is a truth of consciousness; it does not admit of 
argument or of definition. I know that it is so, because I 
feel it, I realize it. I cannot doubt it. I act every hour 
upon the belief of it. I labor for it. I eat, drink, and sleep 
for it. I cannot persuade myself out of it. This is all that 
can be said, and it is enough. It is a truth of intuition, of 
pure reason, of the highest consciousness, and therefore can- 
not be compounded or defined, or made any clearer by any 
amount of argument or process of reasoning. Equal]}' evi- 
dent is it that in the consciousness the universal law of every 
phenomenon must be intuitively seen and felt and acknowl- 
edged by all. Thus the relation, or law of cause and efi:ect, 
or sufficient reason ; and the result is not so much seen as 
known. It is instantly, and upon all occasions, felt as a first 
truth, a fact of pure reason, and an invariable attendant upon 
every act of consciousness. We all believe in it, because we 
feel it; we always act upon it, because we know it. Every 
person in his own experience is fully persuaded of it. As 
soon as a change is perceived, we know it must have a cause. 
As soon as an efiect is produced, we know something must 
have produced it. We feel intuitively that every consequent 
must have an antecedent; every operation a sufficient reason. 
Such is the fundamental law of our consciousness ; other- 
wise all the facts of the world within us would avail us 
nothing. We w^ould be lost in all induction; rather we 
could have no induction. For what is induction? It is 
simply a right classification of facts to arrive at the law of 
those facts. But if there is no invariable relation of ante- 
cedent and consequent, cause and efiect, how can the mind 
ever attain unto the law of facts ? If fire burns one person 
and freezes another, if gravity brings one heavy bodj^ to the 
ground and raises another up from the ground, where is the 
induction of the law of heat, or of gravity ? Of what use is 
reasoning from facts to their law when there is no law, or an 
endless contradiction of law? If there is no invariability of 
antecedent and consequent, but an endless discord between 



38 WHAT ARE MATTERS OF FACT? 

them, then all facts would be a confused jumbling together 
of materials that would either lead to no knowledge, or only 
lead to misguide. Is it not, then, the first axiom of pure 
reason, the most immediate and invariable truth of con- 
sciousness, that every effect must have a cause, every conse- 
quent an antecedent, every result a sufficient reason? Can 
there be any mistake here? l^o. We must admit this 
law or rush into absolute skepticism. One only alternative 
is to doubt everything, or admit this law. We must doubt 
an external world and an internal world, our own existence, 
and the existence of things Avithout us, all matters of fact, 
and all the relation of ideas. We must rush into self-annihi- 
lation, disown our own being, and live, feel, and act as if 
there was neither a world within us nor without us. We must 
deny all rules of obligation and every principle of duty; all 
faith, all reason, all induction, and all consciousness. 

But can we do this? Impossible ! There is a point reached 
when the most obstinate skepticism is compelled to cure itself, 
when the most unlimited doubts are forced to work their 
own ruin. Whether we will or not, the facts of the external 
world enter, by the avenue of the senses, into the mind. To 
doubt the facts of the world without us, we must destroy the 
senses; and to doubt the facts of the world within us, we 
must destroy the consciousness; and we can deny neither, — 
we are compelled to admit the facts of both. 

"The law of every phenomenon," says Jouffroy, "is a 
pure conception of reason ; like all legitimate axioms, as 
soon as we perceive any change whatever, we know at once 
that it is an effect, that it has a cause, that this cause has 
acted to produce it, — that it has been determined to produce 
it by some deciding influence, and, finally, that this effect 
becomes itself a cause, and produces in its own turn some 
new result. All this is the product of reflection alone, before 
observation has ascertained the cause, the operation, the 
sufficient reason, and the result. All this appears to be true, 
not because we see that it is, but because we know that it 
must be ; and precisely on account of this necessity our 
reason confidently applies it to all possible cases, and regards 
it as the universal law of every phenomenon." 



CHAPTEE III. 

GENERAL LAWS OF THE EARTH AND SUN. 

*' What we call a general law," says Whewell, " is in truth 
a form of expression including a number of facts of the like 
kind. The facts are separate, the unity of view by which we 
associate them, the character of generality and of law resides 
in those relations which are the object of the intellect. The 
law once apprehended by us, takes, in our minds, the place of 
the facts themselves, and is said to govern or determine them, 
because it determines our anticipations of what they will be. 
But we cannot, it would seem, conceive a law founded on 
such intelligible relations to govern and determine the facts 
themselves, any otherwise than by supposing also an intelli- 
gence by which these relations are contemplated and these 
consequences realized. We cannot, then, represent to our- 
selves the universe governed by general laws, otherwise than 
b}' conceiving an intelligent and conscious Deity, by whom the 
laws were originally contemplated, established, and applied. 
This, perhaps, will appear more clear, when it is considered 
that the laws of which we speak are often of an abstract and 
complex kind, depending upon relations of space, time, and 
other properties, which we perceive by great attention and 
thought. These relations are often combined so variously 
and curiously that the most subtle reasonings and calcula- 
tions which we can form are requisite, in order to trace their 
results. Can such laws be conceived to be instituted without 
any exercise of knowledge and intelligence ? Can material 
objects apply geometry and calculation to themselves ?" 

When we have ascertained the law of facts in the physical 
world, we are compelled by the verj^ existence of that law to 
attrib.ute it to some intelligent cause. By this principle alone 
can we account for the operation of laws acting all in due 

(39) 



40 GENERAL LAWS OF 

proportion and harmony, never conflicting with each other, 
and so adjusted as to secure the wisest purposes. 

Consider the law of gravity by which the earth is kept in 
its peculiar sphere, and all other worlds are controlled in 
their position and velocity. By this law all bodies are 
attracted inversely as the square of their distance. How 
happened it that a mathematical laAV so exact is so universal ? 
Why do all our researches in astronomy reveal the same 
uniform law? Our essential idea of chance is irregularity? 
and blind, meaningless action. We may imagine a fortuitous 
concourse of atoms, but we never can ascribe to fortuitous con- 
course an undeviating principle of regularity, binding in har- 
mony all worlds, and preserving the harmless equilibrium of 
all motion. Suppose the law of attraction different from 
what it now is, one thing can, with certainty, be predicted. 
The existing state of things upon this earth would be alto- 
gether changed. Imagine this law, instead of inversely as 
the square of the distance, to be directly as the square of the 
distance, what would be the result? Under this law the 
gravity of bodies at the surface of our world would be de- 
stroyed. There would be nothing that would weigh or fall 
downward. A ball thrown up in the air would revolve like 
the moon around the earth. All stability would cease, and 
no sooner would things be raised from the ground than 
they would describe a circle around the earth. And yet it 
has been shown by J^ewton that, so far as the solar system 
was concerned, planets would revolve round their suns in 
circular orbits. Why, if there is no designing mind, should 
precisely that law take place that w^ould secure orbits nearly 
circular, and yet not interfere with the gravity of each planet ? 
If, on the other hand, the law had been inversely as the cube 
of the distance, it would follow that a planet would describe 
a spiral line about the sun, and either come perpetually 
nearer to him, or go farther from him. If, again, the attrac- 
tion had been inversely as the simple ratio of the distance, it 
would have altogether interfered with the stability and har- 
mony of the system. Why, then, was precisely that law in- 
stituted that is in every respect most adapted to the preser- 



THE EARTH AND SUN. 41 

vation of the earth and the comfort of ali who live in it ? 
Why, then, if there was no designing mind, would it not 
have been different? Gravity, as ^NTewton himself declares, 
is an appendage to the essential qualities of matter, not an 
inherent property of all matter. If, then, we imagine it 
universal to all matter, we have yet in right to consider it 
necessary to matter. When we thus consider the simplicity 
of this law with its universality, when we reflect that the 
same law holds good with the atoms of matter, as all spheri- 
cal bodies, what reason have we to ascribe a principle of 
attraction so indispensable, and yet so uniform, to anything 
but an intelligent cause? That all particles of matter and 
all worlds should obey thus harmoniously this law, and yet 
no contriving mind to originate it, seems in the highest de- 
gree incredible. Observe the mass of our earth. The earth 
moves in a slightly oval orbit around the sun, and is nearer 
the sun in the winter by one-thirtieth of the diameter of its 
orbit. So far as we can judge, the force of gravity depends 
upon the mass of the earth. If, now, the force of gravity was 
much greater or much less than it is, the whole order of 
things would be deranged upon this earth ; we would see all 
things too light or too heavy ; all voluntary or involuntary 
motion would be either painful through the increase of 
weight, or unstable through its decrease. With difficulty 
would we walk or run, and the muscular exercise of all ani- 
mals would be attained with extreme fotigue, or our move- 
ments would be too quick and unstable. Thus the earth 
would be like an ill-adjusted machine. It is well known 
that vegetables have the power of pumping up into the 
branches and leaves the sap that nourishes the plant. This 
internal force is great, as has been proved by experience. 
Hales found, for instance, that a vine in the bleeding season 
could push up its sap in a glass tube to the height of twenty- 
one feet above the stump of an amputated branch. ISTow, 
the whole support of the vegetable creation depends upon 
the exact adjustment of the force of gravity. It has been 
found that not only are different vegetables adapted alone to 
a different climate, and a particular season of the year, but 



42 GENERAL LAWS OF 

the power of gravity must "be what it now is, neither less nor 
more, or, as the consequence, the vegetable creation withers 
and dies. Was our earth twice as heavy or as light as it 
now is, vegetation, as now constituted, would not exist. The 
sap would run in that way as effectually to preclude all 
growth. Thus, we see that the law of gravity is exactly 
adjusted to existing laws of the vegetable world. 

Consider also the distribution of the day and the year: 
the one marks the revolution of the earth upon its axis; 
the other, the revolution of the earth around the sun. Now, 
the year is adjusted to the cycle of the vegetable world, even 
as it is to the wants of the animal creation. Thus also it is 
with the length of the day. Was the day six hours long in- 
stead of twenty-four, the existing rehxtions of the vegetable 
and animal world would be altogether changed. So also 
if our year was six months instead of twelve months long. 
Why, then, should we have our days and our years exactly to 
correspond to the necessities of animals and vegetables? 
Why the solar year so invariable in its length? Can it with 
reason be imagined that no design is shown in the wonder- 
ful harmony that prevails in the length of the year and day, 
and the existing wants of the animal and vegetable world? 
If our day was but six or twelve hours in length, what de- 
rangement would ensue to the earth! I^either the proper 
period of sleep or action would exist. Our days would be 
too short for labor or for rest. If also the year was but six 
months long, the system of vegetation would be wholly in- 
terrupted. Thus, in every respect, we see deep foresight in 
the adjustment of the day and year for living in the world. 
But how could such an adjustment be developed from the 
constitution alone of man, animals, and plants? Upon the 
supposition of an infinitely wise Creator it can easily be ac- 
counted for, but it cannot be attributed to any other cause. 
Consider the wonderful exactness in the length of the day. 
According to the calculations of Laplace, it is impossible that 
the difference of one-hundredth of a second of time should 
have obtained between the length of the day in the earliest 
ages of the world. Why is it, then, we see no retarding of 



THE EARTH AND SUN. 43 

motion in this machine, when under no circumstances is it 
possible for us to construct one with invariable motion ? Is 
there any inherent principle in the matter of the earth that 
for thousands of years sends it spinning round its axis with- 
out losing even a second of time ? Had the earth slackened 
in its motion but the hundredth part of a second of time in 
a revolution, the day would be lengthened, during six thou- 
sand years since the creation of man, six hours, and thus the 
whole animal and vegetable economy of our earth would be 
deranged. But the same law is also necessary for the pre- 
servation of the annual motion of the earth. If the motion 
was retarded by any other law instead of the one we now 
have, the earth would approach nearer and still nearer to 
the sun, until it reached the center. Thus also with the other 
planets. They would all at last fall into the sun, and the whole 
solar system would become one chaotic mass. Of all laws, 
then, the one selected for the earth's motion on its axis is the 
best. Of all possible ones, it is the only one that secures 
stability and harmony to the planetary system. But what 
would the earth be without the sun ? And yet the sun is a 
self-luminous body, while the earth and all the planets are 
opaque bodies. That the sun should be the center of our 
planetary system, itself luminous, while all the bodies re- 
volving round it are wholly different, and still no designing 
mind to construct the one to o-lve lio;ht and heat, and the rest 
to be only the recipients of light and heat, is impossible. For 
with what appearance of plausibility can we suppose the 
planets to be by some unknown principle struck off' from the 
sun, and yet not partake of the light-imparting and heating 
power of the sun ? Our solar system w^ithout the sun would 
be locked up in the chains of eternal cold and darkness: no 
life or vegetation would be possible; and yet the planets, 
if they were not created distinct from the sun, having no 
self-luminous and heating property, then they must have had 
their origin from the sun. But if the planets originated from 
the sun, which is a light-bearing and heat-imparting agent, 
how then could they be directly the reverse ? If, as has been 
supposed, the light and heat of the sun proceed from its 



44 GENERAL LAWS OF 

coating or peculiar atmosphere, why have not the planets 
the same ? How happens it, if they have a common origin, 
that we should see no semblance between the planets and 
the sun ? Now, although the sun is the machine that lights 
up and warms the planets, yet without this it could be the 
center of attraction; but then the planets would revolve 
round the sun only as a rayless and dead assemblage of clods, 
utterly cold and repulsive. The light and heat are super- 
added to the more mechanical arrangements of the universe. 
Suppose, now, no interposition was necessary to regulate the 
movements of the system, how can we account for the pecu- 
liar condition of the sun, by which, in all the planetary revo- 
lutions, we have days and seasons? Can gravity be any 
solution to this difficulty? If the solar machine can move 
of itself, what first set it a going, and then gave days and 
seasons ? Light and heat are immeasurably different from 
gravity. How came, then, the sun to have light and heat, and 
not the planets that revolve round it? Thus clearly did the 
greatest of astronomers perceive the necessity of some design- 
ing mind. 

'^ And thus might the sun and fixed stars," says IS'ewton, 
''be formed, supposing the matter w^ere of a lucid nature. 
But how the matter should divide itself into two sorts, and 
that part w^hich is fit to compose a shining body should fall 
down into one mass and make a sun, and the rest, which is 
fit to compose an opaque body, should coalesce not into one 
great body like the planets, or the planets' lucid bodies, like 
the sun, how he alone should be changed into a shining body 
while all they continue opaque, or all they be changed into 
opaque ones, while he continued unchanged, I do not think 
explicable by mere natural causes, but am forced to ascribe 
it to the counsel and contrivance of a voluntary agent." 

There is nothing more wonderful than light: when we con- 
sider the vast variety of purposes that it subserves, the inti- 
mate relation that it sustains to all vegetation, and its absolute 
necessity for all sight, we are not more impressed with the 
universality of its agency than with the greatness of its be- 
neficence. Plow would all vegetation and animal life cease, 



THE EARTH AND SUN. 45 

did one long night of Egj'ptian darkness rest upon the earth! 
Consequently among all the material emblems to represent 
the peculiarities of the mental state, the figure of light is 
most impressive and most common. So wonderful is light in 
its action, so needful is it for our wants, that we embody as 
our highest idea of wretchedness a state of interminable dark- 
ness. But light possesses laAvs of the most remarkable nature. 
Whether light be the emission of luminous particles from the 
sun, or vibrations through a most subtile and elastic ether per- 
vading all space, has not yet been fully determined, although 
the latter view is most common at the present day. But light 
possesses an amazing velocity. When, then, we consider the 
rapidity of its movements, vastly greater than that of any 
other substance, with its properties of reflection, refraction, 
polarization, and periodical colors produced by crystals and 
b}^ their plates ; when we reflect upon its perfect adaptation 
to vision, painting with inimitable beauty upon the retina 
of the eye not only every diversity of color, but the most 
exact proportion of objects, taking into the field of its vision 
alike the lofty mountain, the ocean, with its ceaseless motion, 
the bird, the flower, and the minutest insect, how impressive 
is the evidence of design ! Was there any appreciable 
weight to the sun-ray, the eye would be instantly destroyed. 
Could the subtile process of chemistry discover the most at- 
tenuated size to the particles of light, their amazing velocity 
from the sun would be as fatal to all vegetable and to all animal 
life as a deluge from the heavens of cannon-balls. Why, then, 
should weight be imparted to matter precisely where it is 
needed, and all appreciable weight taken away where it is not 
needed ? Here is a substance most intimately related to heat, 
lighting up the world with glory, painting the sky with a 
thousand tints of beauty, imparting heat to all vegetable ex- 
istence, and joy to all animal motion; unveiling the love- 
liness of every landscape, and the grandeur of revolving 
worlds, and yet in itself so harmless, so beneficial, so univer- 
sal, that, penetrating through the vast regions of space, it 
shows forth the mute praise of all inorganic substances, and 
inspires with electric pleasure all sensitive existence. How 



46 GENERAL LAWS OF 

can atheism, when there is contemplated the properties of 
light, its essential dissimilarity from all material things, its 
power of reflection, hj which it is reflected and scattered hj 
all objects, and then comes to the eye from all ; its power of 
refraction, by which its course is bent when it passes obliquely 
out of one transparent medium into another, and by which, 
consequently, convex, transparent substances, such as the 
cornea and the humors of the eye, possess the faculty of 
making the light converge to sl focus or point ; with its power 
of polarization, by which., when the vibrations of light are 
transverse, they may be resolved into two diflferent planes, or 
double refraction; by which, when they fall on a medium which 
has diflerent elasticity in diflerent directions, they will be 
divided into two sets of vibrations, — how, when light 
possesses peculiarities so wonderful, can it ever imagine that 
no designing mind made the light, and adjusted it to the 
varied wants of the universe? 

Contemplate the laws of heat in respect to the earth, the 
atmosphere, and the water. The earth, like all solid bodies, 
is capable of conducting heat and of radiating heat. There 
is this peculiarity in respect to the earth, — that if this mass of 
matter varied much from its present magnitude and density, 
or from the laws of heat now pertaining to it, all vegetation 
and animal life, as now existing, must cease. There are laws 
of mathematical precision that limit the degree of heat in its 
conduction and radiation to its prescribed measure. Now, 
there is no reason why the earth should conduct and radiate 
heat as it now does necessarily. The earth might possess 
different elements, and then the measure of heat would be 
altogether changed. If the earth were a globe of pure iron, 
it would probably conduct heat twenty times as well as it now 
does; if its surface were polished iron, it would only radiate 
one-sixth as much as it does. Changes far less than these 
would subvert the whole thermal condition of the world, and 
make it unfit for habitation. Consider the laws of heat in 
respect to the atmosphere. We live in an aerial ocean most 
beneficently adjusted in its composition to vegetable and 
animal life. The atmosphere possesses, in diflerent propor- 



THE EARTH AND SUN. 47 

tions, dry air, or air free from water and aqueous vapor, both 
transparent and highly elastic. The machinery of the weather 
is not only extremely complex, but most happily adjusted to 
the wants of vegetables and animals. The heat of different 
climates is diffused and tempered by the atmosphere. Its 
range of influence is from the poles to the equator: thus it 
circulates over the whole earth. It executes many smaller 
circuits between the sea and the land. It enters, as an essen- 
tial element, into the growth of plants and animals. It is the 
atmosphere that converts sunbeams into daylight. It is the 
great medium of sound, and thus performs the distinct office 
of communication between intelligent creatures ; and yet 
such is the weight and due quantity of the atmosphere, that 
the most violent winds soon subside, and perform the friendly 
office of purifying the climate, and aftbrding facility to all 
navigation. While the atmosphere is ever present, it is never 
in our way; adapting itself to the endless changes of heat, it 
combines every element essential to our happiness ; possessing 
a mobility the most remarkable, it contains properties so 
distinct, that it subserves purposes the most varied. Was the 
amount of the atmosphere much greater, or was its weight 
different from what it now is, either too heavy or too light, 
all existence, animal or vegetable, would be in the highest 
degree endangered; were the proportion of the elements that 
enter into the atmosphere in any considerable degree changed, 
life would not exist. Possessing a small portion of carbonic 
acid, it imparts the carbon, when light is present, to vegeta- 
bles, while at the same time it receives from plants the disen- 
gaged oxygen. Thus an element essential to animal life is 
absorbed in the atmosphere; while carbon, which, be^-ond a 
certain proportion, is highly pernicious, is by plants extracted 
from the atmosphere. Did this atmosphere possess a propor- 
tion of oxygen one-fourth or one-third greater than its present 
amount, there would be too much fuel for animal life ; was 
the proportion of nitrogen much greater than it now is, there 
would be too little to support life. Thus the exact amount 
of nearly one-tifth oxygen to four-fifths nitrogen is proved to 
be the degree most conducive to life. Was it chance that 



48 GENERAL LAWS OF 

mingled these subtile gases thus appropriately together? 
The aqueous portion of the atmosphere varies from the one- 
hundredth to the one-twentieth part of the whole aerial ocean 
that encircles the earth. Observe that the aqueous air is as 
essential as the dry air; both combined are necessary for 
vegetable and animal life. The atmosphere is the vehicle to 
convey the aqueous vapor. Was now this vapor administered 
pure, it would not have subserved the wants of the organized 
creation ; it must be diluted by the agency of the dry air to be 
serviceable. Suppose there were no other atmosphere but 
the vapor which arises from its watery parts, we can easily 
anticipate the result. The heat being greater at the equator, 
there would ensue greater rarity and elasticity to the vapor 
than what existed toward the poles. There would then be 
a perpetual current of steam toward the poles, which, coming 
in contact with the colder vapor of the poles, would be pre- 
cipitated into rain or snow; and thus, while there would be 
a cloudless sky at the equator, in all other latitudes there 
would be perpetual clouds, fogs, and rains, and near the 
poles an incessant fall of snow. While had we only dry air, we 
should find most seriously injured all plants and animals. 
IN'ow we have both so adjusted together that we have just 
that variety in the climate essential for the welfare of the or- 
ganized creation. But more than this, amid incessant change 
there is a constant tendency to a proper equilibrium. We 
never lind such an excess of only one element of the atmos- 
phere, or such a violence of it, as permanently to interfere 
with the welfare of vegetation and animal existence. Steam 
and air, both elastic and transparent fluids, while so nearly 
alike, yet vary in respect to their expansion by heat so much 
as to be useful antagonistic forces. Thus, the same degree 
of heat applied produces currents in different directions, 
and there is such a mixture and balancing of these fluids 
that our fields and fruits have alternate sunshine and water, 
and thus in the happiest degree is the growth of vegetation 
developed. The influence of these two fluids upon the tem- 
perature is most important : one moderates the other. 'Now, 
among so many conflicting laws of heat operating upon the 



THE EARTH AND SUN. 49 

elements that compose the atmosphere, it is remarkable that 
the adjustment is so uniform that every derangement of the 
atmosphere has a certain limit where it must stop. Here 
are different laws of heat : each acting unrestrained would 
bring ruin upon the earth; but they are so counterbalanced 
by opposite laws, are so restrained by antagonist forces, that 
altogether they move in harmony, or when that harmony is 
temporarily interrupted, they carrj^ within themselves a prin- 
ciple of self-preservation that soon restores the deranged 
equilibrium. Thus, a tempest, however violent, is soon over ; 
and the ocean waves, however lashed by the wind, never pass 
beyond a prescribed limit. But why should it be so, if there 
is no controlling mind to regulate the laws of the weather? 
Why, when the ship oscillates to and fro, and the tempest 
wave beats upon it, should that oscillation not keep on in- 
creasing in intensit}' until it results in the ruin of the vessel ? 
Why, when it has reached a certain point, should it suddenly 
stop and begin a retrogressive movement ? What inherent 
necessity is- there in the atmosphere that perpetually should 
teach it the same unvarying moderation, and bind the unsta- 
ble winds within a sphere of action as exact as that which 
controls the raging of the sea? The exact adjustment of 
conflicting laws, so that all should act in harmony, is the 
highest evidence of infinite skill. 

In observing the transmission of heat through water, we 
perceive a marked diflTerence from the transmission of heat 
through solids. Heat is communicated through water, not 
by being conducted from one part of the fluid to another, as 
in solid bodies, but by being carried with the parts of the 
fluid by means of an intestine motion. The general law of 
heat is to expand, and make lighter water by means of the 
colder portion of the water descending to the warmer part, 
and that taking the place of the warm water. Opposite cur- 
rents are engendered, by which there is a speedy equalization 
eflfected of temperature unlike the slow process of conduction 
of heat through solids. Hence we see the temperature 
of water much more uniform than the surrounding atmos- 
phere, and inequalities much less than in solids. Conse- 

4 



50 GENERAL LAWS OF 

quently a reciprocal influence is exerted by land and water. 
The heat of the former is greatly modified by the presence of 
water, so that both extremes of heat and cold are diminished. 
Water, by heat, expands, while by cold it contracts. Observe 
how deviations from a law so uniform take place under those 
circumstances adapted for the preservation of all organic 
life. Was this law not departed from in any state of the 
water, the result would be that all the lakes and rivers would 
be locked up in ice. Animal and vegetable existence would 
eventually cease whenever there was the prevalence of cold. 
The reason is obvious. As the heat declined the cold water 
would be congealed into ice and form upon the bottom of 
bodies of water, since the heavier particles of water would 
naturally descend to the bottom, and thus there soon would 
be formed a solid body of ice, which would gradually increase 
until the whole was frozen. Now, water contracts by cool- 
ing down to forty degrees of Fahrenheit's thermometer; in 
cooling further it expands, and when cooled to thirty-two de- 
grees it freezes. Thus we see, however much it cools, it 
cannot form upon the bottom of rivers and lakes in ice, for 
as soon as it contracts by cold down to forty degrees it begins 
to expand, and thus by its superior levity rises to the top. 
Another peculiarity of water is, that in the very act of freez- 
ing at the temperature of thirty-two degrees it experiences a 
new and sudden expansion, by which the ice at all tempera- 
tures ever floats upon the top as specifically lighter than the 
surrounding water. Thus, by this remarkable deviation from 
the law of expansion by heat and contraction by cold, we see 
obviated the most terrific evils. The ice, being a very bad 
conductor of. heat, while it equalizes the temperature of the 
water, can never become too thick for subsequent melting, 
unless in the extreme polar regions; while water, by cold, 
assumes the form of ice, by heat it takes the form of steam. 
The moisture that floats in the air is essential for all vegeta- 
tion. The aqueous vapor by condensation produces clouds; 
when there is an increase of cold the aqueous vapor becomes 
snow through a process of crystallization. There is a pecu- 
liar circumstance attending the change of ice to water, and 



THE EARTH AND SUN. 51 

water to steam. This takes place according to an invariable 
degree of heat, but not suddenly ; when we increase the heat 
to this degree where thaw commences, and where boiling 
takes^ place, there is a stand taken in the temperature. Thus, 
the temperature of a thawing mass of ice cannot be raised 
until the whole is thawed ; nor can the temperature of steam 
rising from water be raised until the whole is converted into 
steam. By this arrangement all changes occupy a considera- 
ble time ; if it was different, thaw and evaporation would be 
instantaneous : consequently all water, when reaching the boil- 
ing point, would flash into steam, and at the first touch of 
heat, snow and ice would be dissolved into water. Observe, 
that in condensation and evaporation there is an obvious 
violation of a law at a certain point ; thus, while by this reverse 
movement ice is made lighter than water, so as to float upon 
it, the change at a certain degree of heat is so gradual that 
the most beneficial results ensue. How happened it, if there 
was no designing mind, that this law of contraction by cold 
and expansion by heat should at a certain point be reversed, 
and thus adapt itself to the wants of the world ? With other 
fluids other laws do in fact exist, — why, if there is no con- 
triving mind, should we see with water so singular an adapta- 
tion to the necessities of the world ? 

1^0 laws are so indispensable for existence upon this earth 
as the laws oi friction. In ordinary cases with solids, their 
movement through the agency of friction often exceeds 
one-third, one-half, and sometimes even the whole of their 
weight. Observe now, that friction is intermediate between 
two great forces : the property of cohesion that exists in 
the growth of vegetation with the ever-movable power of 
growth, and the pumping up of the sap into the branches 
and leaves, and the fixed property of crystallization that exists 
in solids. If friction partook of the mobility of the former, 
the highest instability would exist upon the earth; or if of the 
immobility of the latter, all things would be enchained in 
bonds that would preclude all life. Without friction we could 
not walk: we should be prevented from making anything, 
and the most ordinary purposes of life would be wholly frus- 



52 GENERAL LAWS OF 

trated. Observe the singular adaptation of friction to the 
world we live in. Did friction exist in the heavens where 
the planets move, all motion would be stopped, and there 
would be ruin to every planet and sun in the universe. Did 
friction not exist upon the earth, a ruin equally as great 
would ensue. Thus we see that it exists where it is wanted, 
and does not exist where it is not wanted. Was friction not 
intermediate between the crystalline forces that bind rocks 
together, and the perpetual mutability of vegetables, equally 
impossible would be existence. What is needed in friction 
is the capacit}^ of readily receiving alternately the states of 
rest and motion. And thus we find it, because objects can 
easily be put in motion, and yet soon by friction return to a 
condition of rest, there is an unlimited sphere opened up for 
the contriv^ance and the energy of man. Thus, friction is 
neither abolished upon the earth, nor active in the heavens. 
But we have no reason to believe that friction is a necessary 
result of other properties of matter, as of their solidity and 
coherency. So far as we know, friction is a separate prop- 
erty of matter, and bestowed upon it for the wisest ends. 
Observe the stability of the solar system. It has been seen 
that there is no appreciable friction in the heavens, conse- 
quently all the deviations observed during the different ages 
of the world reveal, even if there be a resisting medium, a 
proportion of irregularity infinitely small. The movement 
of the earth on its axis has not changed the hundredth part 
of a second. The perpetual perturbations of the planets in 
each other's motions are found to be not indefinitely pro- 
gressive, but periodical. They reach a maximum value and 
then diminish. Thus, in the solar system we find a constant 
provision for its stability ; and whatever may be the irregu- 
larities existing, they are only periodical, and even tend to 
adjust themselves. Reflect upon the infinite value of such a 
state of things. Did the perturbations of the planets continue 
progressive, those perturbations would increase to a degree 
as to destroy all stability in the universe. The planetary 
orbits, from being nearly circular, would tend incessantly to 
a more oval form, until such would be the eccentricities of 



THE EARTH AND SUN. 53 

motion as tliat planet would jostle against planet, and all 
eventually would tumble into the sun. How, without divine 
foresight, could the adjustments of the thirty different bodies 
connected with our solar system be so made as that, while 
mutually attracting each other, each describing different 
orbits, and all diverse motions, they yet would never interfere 
with each other's movements, and continue upon the whole 
in one undeviating course of regularity? When, in the 
greatness of this problem, we must include the foct that even 
the perturbations are periodical, and estimate also the differ- 
ent velocities of each planet around its axis, as well as around 
the sun, and then reflect that the different degrees of weight 
of every planet enters as an essential element into the calcu- 
hition, is it conceivable that any cause than an infinitely 
powerful and intelligent Being could preserve such harmony, 
and bring about such perfect stability ? 

" I have succeeded in demonstrating," says Laplace, " that, 
whatever be the masses of the planets, in consequence of the 
fact that they all move in the same direction in orbits of 
small eccentricities, and slightly inclined to each other, their 
secular inequalities are periodical, and inclined within nar- 
row limits; so that the planetary system will only oscillate 
about a mean state, and will never deviate from it, except 
by a very small quantity. The ellipsis of the planets always 
will be nearly circular. The ecliptic will never coincide with 
the equator, and the entire extent of the variation in its 
inclination cannot exceed three degrees." 

I^ow, when we consider that of the simple substances that 
enter into the composition of our world there may be about 
fi.fty, and that each of these substances possesses different 
mechanical and chemical laws, operating in a way perfectly 
distinct from each other, how can it be supposed that these 
simple substances would, by their own accord, adapt them- 
selves to each other? Be it remembered they no more make 
up our earth, of themselves, than do the iron and timber and 
all the varied materials of a man-of-war floating upon the 
water make up the vessel, when they are originally taken in 
their native state. These materials have got to be adjusted 



54 GENERAL LAWS OF THE EARTH AND SUN. 

together; they must be put into their proper place; each 
separate part of the ship must develop the contrivance of 
some mind; there must be order and proportion and exact 
weight observed. There must be a skillful collection of the 
whole ; foresight shown in the proportion of every plank, the 
driving of every nail, the length of every rope, and the fasten- 
ing of every sail. All these distinct materials do not jostle 
themselves together into the stately vessel that marches in 
majesty over the waters. There must be a contriving mind. 
Even so is it with the arrangements of the substances that 
make up our world. A wisdom, whose profound depths no 
finite intelligence can fathom, is revealed in the machinery 
of the world and the universe, giving harmony to every 
diversity of law, disarming the power of every antagonistic 
element, adjusting every separate force, giving due propor- 
tion to every substance, and uniting all in one sublime and 
glorious whole. 



CHAPTEE lY. 

THE DEVELOPMENT THEORY. 

The author of the ^'Vestiges of Creation" holds, in his 
development theory, the same ideas, essentially, as Oken and 
Lamarck. Thus, he says : " The fundamental form of or- 
ganic being is a globule forming within itself, and that 
globules can be produced in albumen by electricity, conse- 
quently that electricity is the cause of life." "All animals 
pass in embryo through phases resembling the general as 
well as the particular character of those of lower grade." 
"Man himself is not exempt from this law, — his first form is 
that which is permanent in the animalcula. This organiza- 
tion gradually passes through conditions generally resembling 
a fish, a reptile, a bird, and the lower mammalia ; at one of 
the last stages of his foetal career he exhibits an intermax- 
illary bone, which is characteristic of the perfect ape; this is 
suppressed, and he may then be said to take leave of the 
simial type, and become a true human creature.^' Sex, too, 
in the " Yestiges of Creation," is spoken of as a matter of 
development. " All beings are at one stage of the embryotic 
process female, and a certain number of these are afterwards 
to be of the more powerful sex." " The first step in the crea- 
tion of life upon this planet was a chemico-electric operation, 
by which simple germinal vesicles were produced. The next 
step was an advance, under favor of peculiar conditions, from 
the simplest forms of being to the next more complicated, 
and this through the medium of the ordinary process of 
generation ; and finally, that the simplest and most primi- 
tive type, under a law to which that of like production is 
subordinate, gave birth to the type next above it, and this 
again produced the next higher, and so on to the very 
highest." 

(55) 



56 THE DEVELOPMENT THEORY. 

The researches of science show, in direct opposition to the 
development theory, that man and all the species of animals 
owe their origin direct to miracle. Says the celebrated Ger- 
man physiologist, M. Aliiller : "All the phenomena hitherto 
observed in the animal kingdom seem to prove that tl>e 
species were originally created distinct, and independent of 
one another. There is not a remote possibility that one 
species has been produced from another." 

Unless we would have the force of the argument from 
effect to cause immeasurably weakened in respect to the 
origin of man, and the Deity lost sight of in natural law, we 
must beware of the insidious sophistry disguised under the 
shibboleth of law. Miracle, instead of development, is 
claimed for the origin of man and every species of animals. 
It is in the light of this most essential feature of our argu- 
ment from effect to cause that the researches of geology are 
deserving of such careful consideration. Those researches 
most conclusively prove the miraculous origin of man, as de- 
clared in the Holy Scriptures. The development theory is 
in all respects shown to be false, and thus natural law is con- 
fined within its legitimate sphere. Consequently nature is 
not deified at the expense of the great First Cause, and indi- 
rect as well as direct atheism is disrobed of its pretensions. 
While Lamarck, Oken, and the author of the "Vestiges of 
Creation" admit the existence of God, they yet remove him 
back to the creation of atoms, infusoria, and monads, and 
supersede a superintending God for a fatalistic principle, 
whose rigid certainty of continuance is as revolting to the 
most cherished sentiments of an unperverted nature as it is 
to the clearest assertions of Revelation. But the development 
theory not only substitutes law for God, but it is infinitely de- 
rogatory to human nature. There is something noble in the 
idea of man created by God, with a perfect physical, moral, 
and intellectual organization adapted to the loveliness of 
Paradise. The Eden without was but a faint emblem of the 
fairer Eden within. But how mean, in contrast, is the theory 
of gradual development, through ages of time, from the infu- 
soria or animalcula created or brought into existence by the 



THE DEVELOPMENT THEORY. 57 

contact of electricity and albumen, and then from that the 
development of the worm, the fish, the reptile, the bird, the 
quadruped, and finally man ! But the development theory is 
equally as revolting in its teachings respecting the progress 
made from a low t3'pe to a high type of sensitive existence. 
Creation by miracle draws a wide line of demarkation between 
genus and species. It not only denies that the fish ever can 
be developed into the reptile, or the bird into a quadruped, 
or that into man, but it also precludes the development of 
one species of animals into another of the same genus. The 
mackerel never produces the shark, — the snake never origin- 
ates the crocodile, — the. eagle never a sparrow, — the dog 
the cat, nor the elephant a lion. And, although in man genus 
and species are synonymous terms, since all mankind come 
from one stock, yet we see that when there is a fundamental 
difference, as in the male and female sex, there is no develop- 
ment changing man into woman, or woman into man. The 
difi:erence existing between the two sexes is as great now as 
at the first creation of Adam and Eve. The great error of 
the development theory is that it confounds all the original 
distinctions instituted by God between diflPerent races or 
species. It acts the part of an ignorant child in comparative 
anatomy, who takes all the bones of fishes, reptiles, birds, and 
mammals carefully laid on separate shelves, and jumbles them 
all up together in one confused medley. This the develop- 
ment theorizer would call the discovery of unity ; but the 
man of true science can find no unity with individuality de- 
stroyed. The development theor}', in its absurd generaliza- 
tion, overlooks those unalterable distinctions betwemi one 
species and another, or one genus and another, that God has 
made the invariable attendant of creation. A theory that 
develops a monkey from a fish, and man from a monkey, has 
a hundredfold more of the marvelous than creation by 
miracle, while it finds no support either in science or Reve- 
ation. In considering the development theory we have con- 
fined our remarks to animals ; but the objection is equally 
strong when applied to the vegetable and inanimate creation. 
How absurd is the theory that makes, by the slow progress 



58 THE DEVELOPMENT THEORY. 

of natural law, the suns, planets, and comets of the universe 
to be developed from fire mists, with all their motions and 
harmonious revolutions ! Two great facts fatal to the devel- 
opment theory are made known in the researches of geology. 
First, miraculous interpositions have introduced the races 
of fishes, reptiles, quadrupeds, and man at distinct epochs of 
time, and in a way that reveals each dynasty of fishes, rep- 
tiles, quadrupeds, and man not developing a higher dynasty 
from a lower by the actual destruction of its ruling magnates. 
In other words, the supremacy of the dynasty of reptiles 
over that of fishes, and of quadrupeds over that of reptiles, 
is attained unto, not by gradual development, but by great 
epochs of ruin to a lower dynasty making room for a higher 
one. There was a time when fishes were the highest type of 
animals, and the magnates of that genus held an undisputed 
sway. Afterward there followed a period of great ruin to 
the highest species offish, by which countless numbers were 
destroyed, leaving room for animals of a higher organiza- 
tion. Then followed the dynasty of reptiles, and the world 
saw the most magnificent specimens of saurians, and other 
reptiles of terrific strength. After their great epoch of 
supremacy had run out, we are introduced to the dynasty of 
birds and quadrupeds, taking the place of the wide-spread 
destruction of those reptilian monarchs who held in a pre- 
vious age an undisputed swa3\ Here we see great periods of 
ruin introducing animals of higher organization ; but, instead 
of a gradual development of a superior type of being from a 
lower, we find actually that the superior type of being follows 
the ruin of that which precedes it. Thus, we see that the 
ruin of an inferior organization of animals, instead of pre- 
venting the existence of a superior type of creatures, is 
actually necessary for the existence of animals of a nobler 
organization. Each epoch of time witnesses at its com- 
mencement the creative power of God, and at its close great 
catastrophes of ruin. But the development theory overlooks 
these miraculous interpositions ; and while it ofi:ers no reason 
why the extinct species of animals are not now living, it 
vainly attempts to bridge over the mighty gaps in tlie series 



THE DEVELOPMENT THEORY. 59 

of distinct creations by a chain of gradualism that connects 
the highest with the lowest. But there is no such chain. 
Gradual development only extends to one species or distinct 
class of animals; it is only designed for the perpetuation of 
them, but when it has reached this point it stops. Thus, 
the whale may have a great variety of forms and singulari- 
ties of construction ; but how can the whale develop the 
lobster, or the lobster the whale ? The second great geologi- 
cal fact fatal to the development theory is, that there has 
been in each dynasty of fishes, reptiles, birds, and quadrupeds 
a process of degradation going on, or a passing from a high 
organization in diiferent species to a lower tjpe of being. 
Thus, at the commencement of each dynasty of fishes, reptiles, 
birds and mammals, we see the beginning of each dynasty 
giving us the best, and not the poorest type of organization. 
The process of degradation is of a twofold nature. There is 
first a gradual extinction of diiferent species in each dynasty, 
and then an inferior type of organization of the same species 
of animals now existing. Thus, we find not only no fishes, 
or reptiles, or birds, or quadrupeds of so high an organization 
as once existed, but even a process of degradation in existing 
species. What can be more fatal to the development theory 
than this ! The whole error of the development theory con- 
sists in the confounding the [xrogress of epochs of time with 
progress in epochs. Because a later epoch of time introduces 
animals of a higher organization, it does not show either 
no miraculous interposition of God, or that the animals of 
a preceding epoch were not the best of their kind. It 
would be poor reasoning to assume that because man is su- 
perior to the monkey, that therefore the monkey developed 
the man. 

" It is now a truth, which I consider as proved," says Pro- 
fessor Agassiz, ^'that the ensemble of organized beings was 
renewed, not only in the intervals of each of the great geo- 
logical formations, but also at the time of the deposition of 
each particular member of all the formations." "I also be- 
lieve very little in the genetic descent of living species from 
those of the various tertiary layers, which have been regarded 



60 THE DEVELOPMENT THEORY. 

as identical, but which, in my opinion, are specifically dis- 
tinct. I cannot admit the transformation of species from one 
formation to another." Says Professor Sedg^vick : "All our 
most ancient fossil fishes belong to a high organic type ; and 
the very oldest species that are well determined fall naturally 
into an order of fishes which Owen and MUller place, not at 
the bottom, but at the top of the whole class." Says Presi- 
dent Hitchcock : " IsTumerous races of animals and plants 
must have occupied the globe previous to those which now 
inhabit it, and have successively passed away as catastrophes 
occurred, or the climate became unfit for their residence. 
l!Tot less than thirty thousand species have already been dug 
* out of the rocks, and, excepting a few hundred species, 
mostly of sea-shells, occurring in the uppermost rocks ; 
none of them correspond to those now living on the globe. 
In Europe they are found to the depth of about six and a half 
miles, and in this country deeper; and no living species is 
found more than one-twelfth of this depth ; all the rest are 
specifically, and often generically, unlike living species; and 
the conclusion seems irresistible that they must have lived 
and died before the creation of the present species." 

" The fact that fishes and reptiles were created at an earlier 
day than the beasts of the field and the human family," says 
Hugh Miller, "gives no ground whatever for the belief 
that the peopling of the earth was one of a natural kind, re- 
quiring time, or that the reptiles have been not only the pre- 
decessors, but also the progenitors of the beasts and of man. 
The geological phenomena, even had the author of the 'Ves- 
tiges ' been consulted in their arrangement and permitted 
to determine their sequence, would yet have failed to fur- 
nish not merely an adequate foundation for the develop- 
ment hypothesis, but even the slightest presumption in its 
favor." " 

Is it not, then, evident that every distinct species of fish, 
birds, and mammals came immediately from the creative 
energy of the great First Cause ? Do we not see that the 
first link of the human chain, and of every distinct genus and 
species of animals, must especially have a beginning from 



THE DEVELOPMENT THEORY. 61 

God ? These diversified species of creatures were effects so 
great, results so wonderful, that no adequate, no conceivable 
cause can be found but God. We look to the laws of the 
inorganic or organic world, to the atoms that compose all 
matter, but we find in them no reason for the origin of 
animals. We have investigated the half-atheistic theory of 
development, but all its deductions are found chimerical and 
opposed to the facts of true science. The development 
theory has nothing to commend it in the history of the past. 
The beginning of the human race, and of every species and 
genus of animals, assure us of effects so peculiar and so 
mighty, that we must look alone to miracle for their cause. 



CHAPTER y. 

MUTUAL ADAPTATIOX OF THE VEGETABLE AND ANIMAL KINGDOM. 

All vegetables have their distinct localities, and their pe- 
culiar spheres of growth. Observe that one great chain of 
dependence runs throughout nature. Without the elements 
of heat, air, water, and earth, all vegetables would die. 
Without vegetables the great support of the animal creation 
would be taken away ; without animals the world would be a 
solitary waste. But not only is there an intimate dependence 
of one department of nature upon another, but a great prin- 
ciple of compensation runs through the whole. The genera- 
tion of animals keeps pace with the vegetable growth. Where 
in one department of nature there is a deficiency, there is 
in another department a superabundance to make it up. 
There is constantly seen the operation of the principle of 
equalization, by which an excess of one department of nature 
is counteracted by a deficiency in another. Passing over the 
peculiarities of the vegetable creation, consider the animal 
kingdom. This world is a living world : myriads of animals 
people it. From the short hour of joy that marks the bound- 
ary of the most ephemeral of creatures to the long years of 
man, there is seen the constant play of life. If we wonder 
at the thought of man, yet those animalcula that live in one 
drop of water present to us their miracles of art. 

" If there be one thing," says Buckland, " more surpris- 
ing than another in the investigation of natural phenomena, 
it is perhaps the infinite extent and vast importance of things 
apparently little and insignificant. When we descry an insect, 
smaller than a mite, moving with agility across the paper on 
"which we write, w^e feel as incapable of forming any distinct 
conception of the minutiae of the muscular fibers which affect 
their movements, and of the still smaller vessels by which 
(62) 



MUTUAL ADAPTATION, ETC. 63 

they are nourished, as we are of fully apprehending the mag- 
nitude of the universe. We are more perplexed in attempting 
to comprehend the organization of the minutest infusoria 
than that of a whale. And one of the last conclusions at 
which we arrive, is a conviction that the greatest and most 
important operations of nature are conducted by the agency 
of atoms too minute to be either perceptible by the human 
eye or comprehensible b}' the human understanding." 

The researches of geology assure us that in the past ages 
of the world there are the remains of innumerable species of 
animals, — that successive layers of the surface of the earth 
make known an amazing extent of animal organization, — 
that in mountains, composed to a large degree of minute 
shells, forming vast masses of limestone deposits, there is 
every indication of myriads of animals once living upon the 
earth. These countless creatures, so far as the investigations 
of science can ascertain, had as perfect an adaptation to a 
former condition of our earth as those animals that now in- 
habit it. The great fact is made known that no abortive 
creation of species come upon the stage of life ; that, trace 
back the long years of the past to its remotest boundary, and 
the same adjustment of animals to the sphere of their exist- 
ence is revealed as now takes place in every living species; 
that the types of animal life were as perfect in their kind, 
and had as great an adaptation to their local habitation, as 
now exists upon the earth. ITow, adaptation means almost a 
countless number of conditions of existence. The air, the 
earth, the water, the degree of heat, the kind of subsistence, 
must all have in the animal a corresponding fitness of con- 
stitution. Eeflect how much that one word constitution 
includes! It means the proper number and proportion of 
limbs, the exact adjustment of all the senses, the internal 
structure that shall precisely correspond to the outward 
sphere of its existence. Not one suitable condition can be 
wanting, or the whole animal mechanism is spoiled. ]^ot 
one of the apparently minute circumstances of its being can 
be missing without detriment to animal life. Two things are 
indispensable to secure the highest excellence to any work. 



64 MUTUAL ADAPTATION, ETC. 

First, skill in the construction, and then a wise purpose in 
the use. How many a work of man has been spoiled from 
the uselessness of its design ! The pyramids of Egypt evince 
skill and power; but who is there that can show a wise use in 
their construction ? But not so with the works of God ; they 
display both skill and a wise end, not only exact adjustment 
to time, place, subsistence, and climate, but wisdom is seen 
in the end of those adjustments. From the noblest specimens 
of animal life to the humblest forms of being, each not only 
have their appropriate sphere, but each have some wise end 
to subserve in that sphere. 



CHAPTER YI. 

PROCESS OF GENERATION IN ANIMALS, AND GERMINATION IN 

PLANTS. 

Palet has well said generation is not a, principle, but ^pro- 
cess. Generation is no solution to the question, What is the 
great cause that brings man into being? The power in or- 
ganized bodies of producing bodies of like organization must 
itself be accounted for. How came this power in organized 
bodies is the question ? How came the reproductive energy 
that gives birth to man ? How came this wonderful process, 
mysteriously wrapped up in the living body, by which a like 
body is generated ? The language, " principle of genera- 
tion," explains nothing. It is itself to be accounted for. 
The deepest researches assure us of a most wonderful labora- 
tory, where the first process of life goes on. We are in- 
structed in the knowledge that a mechanism connected with 
a vital energy works out its miracles of art infinitely surpass- 
ing all the contrivance of man. Who, then, should speak of 
the principle of generation accounting for animals, when that 
very principle itself is to be accounted for? But the use of 
the language principle of generation, as often held, is an ab- 
surdity. Principle is confounded with process. If principle 
means anything, as often used, it must be the elementary cause. 
But this cause is a power distinct from the process itself of 
generation. We have another step to take before we can 
stop with the principle of generation ; that step must be the 
elementary cause itself that gives to generation its vital 
energy. As well might a factory- girl show a stranger the 
wheels and cogs, the straps and iron, that enter into the ma- 
chinery of some great workshop, and pretend to account for 
the operation of the whole by expatiating upon the advan- 
tages of some particular parts. The stranger knows full well 

5 C 65 ) 



66 PROCESS OF GENERATION JN ANIMALS, 

that the result effected can be accounted for only by a vast 
variety of exact adjustments; by the skillful position of every 
wheel, cog, and strap; by the suitable composition of each 
separate material that enters into the whole ; by some force 
constantly applied ; and, above all, by some designing mind 
capable of constructing the machine, competent to effect its 
suitable adjustment, and able to secure the agency of a power 
which, though blind in itself, could yet by proper arrange- 
ment bring about the desired result. But all analogies drawn 
from human mechanism fail to give a just idea of the va- 
riety, the exquisite adjustments of material, position, time 
and place, the elaborate architecture of the bodies of men 
and animals, and the sublime mystery of the complicated 
process that takes place before birth. When a house is 
built, two things are necessary: first, the house itself, and 
then the scaffolding needful for its erection. Before birth 
we find made the mysterious elements of the body; we find 
formed the complicated tissue of nerves and arteries, millions 
of blood channels in the system, sinews and cords, and pores 
for the circulation of the difi'erent fluids. We find a labora- 
tory for the digestion of food surpassing all the imitation of 
man ; an apparatus for breathing of the most wonderful na- 
ture. And yet a very large part of the foetal process is exclu- 
sively prospective. Everything is preparing for the mighty 
change that shall soon introduce the child into a new world. 
^ot more conspicuous is the house itself than the scafibld- 
ihg that is used only for a temporary purpose, and is removed 
as soon as circumstances demand. Can any person affirm 
that the complicated instruments of the body, w^ith their ex- 
act adjustments, are to be accounted for exclusively on the 
principle of generation? But generation is only sl process ; 
this process itself is to be accounted for. Can a pin, a needle, 
the simplest work of a man, lead us to the conclusion of some 
designing mind ? And yet we blunder when we come to a 
workmanship that infinitely surpasses all human ingenuity ! 
If the intelligence of the parent is incompetent for self-con- 
struction, equally incompetent is it to fashion the body and 
the mind of the child. Neither the parent nor the child can 



I 



AND GERMIXATION IN PLANTS. 67 

achieve a wonder so mysterious. " I have not come into 
existence," says Fichte, "by my own power; it woukl be 
the highest absurdity to suppose that before I was at all I 
could bring myself into existence ; I have then been called 
into being by a power out of myself." What makes the 
process of generation all the more conclusive of an infinitely 
desio-nino; mind, is the fact that we can trace back the 
earliest commencement to a point where no evidence can be 
shown of either the bones or members of the body, where 
not even the faintest outline is perceptible of the human sys- 
tem. AVhen we enter the studio of an artist we find at first 
only the simple canvas upon which is to be sketched the well- 
known features of a friend ; but if at successive times we 
enter the room where the painter busies himself in his task, 
we find that the first rude outlines are gradually filled up, 
until, when the work is done, we find the perfect image of our 
friend. Just so it is in filling up the outlines of the human 
system, a divine artist at successive stages fills up the out- 
lines. From the first origin, where are undistinguished the 
faintest lineaments of the human form, there appears at dis- 
tinct periods a bolder filling up of the sketch until the whole 
is perfected. The proof of design is peculiarly shown when 
adaptation is seen developed at each separate period ; when 
from the earliest origin of the human form to its perfect con- 
summation there are revealed higher and yet higher evidences 
of a Divine foresight. There are those who think that when 
they have got a principle, as they call it, they have discovered 
a cause. In the principle of germination in plants and gen- 
eration in animals, they flatter themselves they have found out 
all that is needful to know in respect to the true cause. 
Here, say they, exist in miniature all the difi'erent materials, 
all the curious mechanism of the animal or the plant. But 
how do they know this? How have they found out a me- 
chanism that the highest powers of the microscope fail to dis- 
cover ? How do they know that the perfect plant, or the 
animal, exists in a compass so infinitely small, when the 
highest researches of the magnifying-glass fail to discover 
even the rudest outlines ? Confessing the almost infinitesi- 



68 PROCESS OF GENERATION IN ANIMALS, 

rnal nature of the first germs of vegetable or animal life, why 
do thej presume to draw upon their imaginations for a me- 
chanism in miniature that no researches in science have ever 
been able to find out? True, that mechanism is found at a 
later period in an embryo state, but does that show that it 
existed in the earliest germs of vegetable or of animal life ? 
Does it throw any light upon the mystery of the first com- 
mencement of all animal or of all vegetable organization ? 
Will an}^ pretend to prove that it is the mechanism in the 
germ or the plant that by its own power produces vegeta- 
bles and animals? How can this be shown? '* Suppose," 
says Francis Bowen, " that tw^o grains of sand, looking just 
alike, were placed on the floor before us, and while we were 
watching them they began to expand, shoot up, alter their 
forms, take on all the aspects and qualities of life, and finally 
become distinct and recognizable, the one a giant oak-tree, 
and the other a living and moving creature. On witnessing 
so strange a phenomenon, we could not help concluding that 
some personal agency had produced it, some power trans- 
cending that of man. After satisfying ourselves that there was 
no deception or mystification in the matter, we should at 
once refer it to a supernatural or miraculous cause ; nor w^ould 
this conclusion be at all less logical if the phenomenon were 
a frequent one, — if there were a mountain of such sand, from 
which particular grains being taken at the proper season, and 
carried to the proper place, both time and place being de- 
termined by experience, these results invariably followed. 
Now this is a statement but very little disguised, and vary- 
ing in no essential particular from the description of what is 
actually and constantly taking place all around us in living 
nature. The beginning of all life, and of all tissues, whether 
animal or vegetable, is in certain primitive cells or germinal 
vesicles, perfectly resembling each other in external appear- 
ance, and so minute that they can be discovered only under 
high powers of the microscope. The germs are alike to the 
eye, but according to the place which each is taken from, 
whether from one side or another of the sand-heap, it is de- 
veloped by a regular process into a plant or an animal. If 



AND GERMINATION IN PLANTS. 69 

you say that there are specific differences between these mi- 
croscopic grains, each one veiling some curious and elaborate 
machinery, peculiar to itself, by which this astonishing result 
is brought about, I answer that your assertion is both gratui- 
tous and incredible. It is gratuitous, for certainly we see no 
such machinery, and have no indication whatever of its exist- 
ence ; we see nothing but a little rectangular cell with a dot 
in it. It is incredible, for we can no more conceive of the 
possibility of a machine under such circumstances producing 
such results, than we can believe the automaton reallj' plays 
an admirable game of chess solely by means of wheels, 
springs, and cylinders. In both cases we declare with posi- 
tive conviction, that intelligence, will, and conscious activity 
are somewhere at work in this matter, that some unseen j^er- 
son is actually causing the phenomena." 

A dead mechanism of bones, sinews, veins, arteries, limbs, 
and organs of sight, taste, touch, hearing and smelling, would 
avail nothing if the mysterious principle of life was wanting. 
What makes the human mechanism so wonderful is the 
great fact that it is a living mechanism, — a mechanism that 
will endure when years shall have passed away; a mechan- 
ism so delicate and yet so tenacious, so refined and yet so 
strong that it may survive the helplessness of infancy, the 
vicissitudes of youth, the dangers of manhood, and the de- 
crepitude of old age ; a mechanism that in some instances 
shall pass the remote boundary line of a century. In con- 
sidering the generation of the human body and its subse- 
quent growth, the mind often rests too exclusively upon the 
material part of man. Absurd as the conclusions may be, 
that the microscopic germs of animal or vegetable life em- 
body all the mechanism of the vegetable or animal organiza- 
tion, or that inherent powers exist in the germs capable of 
developing the bodies of animals or vegetables, yet in the 
union of mind with body the evidence is greatly increased 
of the agency of God. 

It has been seen that in the first germs of vegetable or 
animal life there is no evidence of the complicated mechan- 
ism of the future state. These germs appear alike to the eye ; 



70 PROCESS OF GENERATION IN ANIMALS, 

they present to the microscope simply little rectangular or 
circular cells with a dot in them. Can we then suppose that 
in such cells is wrapped up the miniature mechanism of tlie 
future hody, with its elaborate contrivances, its subdivisions 
of material, and curious diversity of bones, muscles, veins, 
arteries, and nerves? Do we ever dream, when we look 
upon some curious specimen of human mechanism, that this 
cylinder of its own accord jumped into its proper place, that 
this band cut itself out of the raw material, and, after passing 
through a dozen processes to lit itself for the machine, did 
in reality go to work to adjust itself to the great water-wheel, 
and then that this wheel put itself into that position by which, 
through the motive power of water, it intelligentl#y turned 
the whole machinery? But those persons who talk about 
the human mechanism as if it was a self-perpetuating, self- 
acting, and self-adjusting machine,— as if its own inherent 
powers gave miniature types of human bodies, and bestowed 
just where was needed the bone and muscle, the veins and 
arteries, the cords and sinews, the hair and nails, the five 
senses and the ditterent limbs, are precisely as blind to the 
designing hand of God as in the other illustration they are 
to the contrivance of man. They overlook essential distinc- 
tions in the one as in the other. Three things most distinct 
enter into the living organization of man : the body, the 
animal life, the soul, or mind. ]S"ow, because we see a com- 
plicated result, such as baffles all imitation, is this result to 
be attributed to the human organization independent of a 
divine agency? If from the unshapen marble a beautiful 
statue should be chiseled out, no person is so blind as to say 
the statue chiseled itself out; but should that statue reveal 
the great miracle of walking, sitting, and breathing, and 
manifest life, then the more should we say a foreign power 
was at work to enable the statue thus to do ; but if, more 
wonderful still, that .statue should reason and think, should 
feel pleasure and pain, should discriminate right from wrong, 
who, for a moment, would doubt the personal agency of God ? 
But consider that we have millions of statues produced — 
living, thinking, feeling, reasoning, and knowing right from 



AND GERMINATION IN PLANTS. 71 

wrong. We have every diversity of material, every perfec- 
tion of art, every ingenuity of design, all wrapped up in the 
human body: we see a threefold union of mechanism, life, 
and mind; we see earth, air, and water adapted to the body. 
Is there not, then, the most conclusive evidence here of the 
work of an infinite mind ? When we consider the wonders 
wrapped up in the mind, life, and body of man, his growth 
from the smallest germs, his adaptation to time, place, and 
sphere of existence ; when we contemplate this living organ- 
ism picturing forth every feature of the mind and sympathy 
of the soul, and manifesting in every movement the grace be- 
coming an intelligent being, is there not meaning in the 
words of inspiration ? 

" Canst thou by searching find out God ? Canst thou find 
out the Almighty unto perfection ? It is as high as heaven ; 
what canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know? 
The measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader 
than the sea." 



CHAPTER VII. 

PROSPECTIVE CONTRIVANCES OF ANIMALS. 

One remarkable principle connected with the animal 
economy, most singular in its operation, is the vital energy 
that is constantly repairing the waste of the body, and in- 
stantly applying a remedy to the injury that may happen to 
the flesh or bones. If a bone is broken, a new bone begins 
to form over the fracture, and actually makes the broken 
part stronger than ever before. If a flesh wound is inflicted, 
nature summons all her resources to repair the waste, and 
secures, if possible, a healthy condition to the wound. 
Thus the body seems always to keep in it sentinels secretly 
upon duty, unobserved, while all goes well, but as soon as 
accident or crime inflicts a bodily injury, then all nature's 
resources are called to the rescue. Mark how soon, when 
the peace of a city is disturbed, the warning rattle is heard, 
and its guardians fly to the rescue ! Thus, in the animal 
economy there walks also, unnoticed, through every avenue 
of the system, sentinels who keep the peace. When all is 
well we have no warning rattle, but let some ruthless invader 
attack the body, and then observe how nature calls upon her 
sentinels to preserve her rights ! Nature reveals a recupera- 
tive power and a warning power. The instinctive principle 
of fear, and the surface of the skin, where the seat of pain 
peculiarly lies, especially subserve the end of a good police to 
give warning of danger; while the recuperative energy of the 
animal economy is the best of physicians, to counteract the 
injuries that happen to the body. Whether we go to the top 
of the scale of animal life, or descend to the lowest type of 
sensitive being, we see a peculiar fitness for the sphere in 
which each animal moves. Everything is perfect in its kind. 
When man works, he slights the humble workmanship, and 
exhausts his time upon the nobler specimens of his invention. 
(^2) 



PROSPECTIVE CONTRIVANCES OF ANIMALS. 73 

ITot so with God : the body of a bee is as perfect in its make 
as that of a man. 

" Birds in cleaning their feathers are supplied with a kind 
of oil for this purpose. There is on each side of the rump of 
birds a small nipple, which, by pressure, yields for their pur- 
pose a butter-like substance, by which the bird anoints and 
adjusts the feathers. Why, unless designed hy God, should 
not unfeathered animals have the same ?" 

"The heron and cormorant are great fishers; the middle 
claw is toothed and notched like a saw. This greatly assists 
them in holding their slippery prey. The gannet, or solan 
goose, has the edges of its bill irregularly jagged, that 
it may hold the faster its prey. Can we attribute these 
peculiar structures to the manner of using these parts? 
Another simple contrivance is the tongue of the icoodpecker. 
This bird lives upon insects chiefly lodged in the bodies of 
decayed trees. First, it is furnished with a straight, angular, 
hard and sharp bill ; with this it bores into the wood, until 
it reaches the cells of the insects, then comes the tongue, of 
such length that tha bird can dart it out three or four inches 
from the bill. Not only in this respect does it difler from the 
tongue of other birds, but it is tipped with a sharp, stifl', 
bony thorn ; then this tip is dentated on both sides like the 
beard of an arrow or barb of a hook. When the bird has 
discovered the retreats of the insects, with a motion exceed- 
ingly quick, it darts out this long tongue, and then transfixes 
them upon the barbed needle at the end of it, and thus draws 
its prey within the mouth." As Paley has well said (in these 
and the following illustrations), " If this be not mechanism, 
what is?" 

" The air-bladder of a fish is a plain evidence of contrivance. 
It is a philosophical apparatus in the body of a fish. By the 
relaxation or compression of the muscles of the fish, the air- 
bladder renders the fish specifically lighter or heavier than the 
water, and thus at pleasure the fish rises or sinks in the water. 

'^ The fang of a viper is a perforated tooth loose at the root ; 
close to its root, and communicating with the perforation, is a 
small bag containing the poison. When irritated, by the 



74 PROSPECTIVE CONTRIVANCES OF ANIMALS. 

pressure of its root against the bag underneath it the poison 
is forced through the tube in the middle of the tooth. What 
an effectual weapon for inflicting injury !" 

" The bag of the opossum is a singular contrivance for the pro- 
tection and support of its young. There is a false skin that 
forms a pouch, into which the young are received. ]N"or is it 
a mere doubling of the skin, but a new organ furnished with 
bones and muscles of its own ; this forms the cradle and con- 
veyance of the 3'oung. Was not intention shown in this 
contrivance?" 

" The stomach of the camel retains large quantities of water, 
and keeps it unchanged for a considerable time ; this is ab- 
solutely needful to enable the camel to journey in the desert, 
where so seldom are they enabled to get water. What, then, 
is the internal organization that secures a purpose so benefi- 
cent to the camel ? There are a number of distinct sacs or 
bags (thirty have been discovered in the dromedary) that lie 
between the membranes of the second stomach, and open 
near the top into the stomach by small, square apertures 
through these orifices. After the stomach is full the annexed 
bags are filled from it, and the water so deposited is not liable 
to pass into the intestines, and is kept from the solid aliment, 
and preserved from mixture with the gastric juice." 

The prospective contrivances of the young of animals 
afford clear illustration of some great designing mind. Ob- 
serve that the period before birth is a sphere of being essen- 
tially different from an after-state of existence. The teeth, 
the eyes, the lungs, are all useless at that time, but infinite 
foresight has prepared them to exercise, precisely when 
wanted, their appropriate office. They lie wrapped up se- 
curely in their first habitation for the eventful period when 
they shall be called upon to perform their new functions. 
Here we see the same provident care displayed by God as 
afterward is shown in leading animals to provide for their 
young. Thus, whatever may be the sphere of action, each 
sphere has its own appropriate duties, and the whole life, with 
all its changing seasons, from its earliest dawn to the last 
closing scene, makes known the watchful care of an infinite 
mind. Consider the principle of compensation in nature. If 



PROSPECTIVE CONTRIVANCES OF ANIMALS. 75 

we take the elephant, we find that his short, unwieldy neck 
is compensated for by a long and highly flexible proboscis, 
by which the food is secured. The crane kind, who live in 
the water, and secure from this element their food, having no 
web feet, have instead long legs for wading and long bills for 
grasping. The spider, without wings to fly, and yet who lives 
upon insects, has a web as a compensating contrivance. The 
lobster, so singular in construction, unable, like other animals, 
to grow by the gradual expansion of the skin with the rest of 
the body, casts off at proper periods its old coat of shell, 
and slipping his feet out of their bonj- in casement as a man 
takes off his boots, in this way secures the same purpose of 
growth that other animals do by a method entirely different. 

Birds have no teeth, but how can graminivorous and her- 
bivorous birds live ? They may be said to carry about with 
them a coffee-mill in their gizzards. So constructed is the 
gizzard that it breaks and grinds the food as effectually as a 
mill. Now the gastric juice, by experiment, is found not to 
operate upon the whole grain, even when softened by water, 
but only when broken into fragments. Without this peculiar 
apparatus the chicken would starve upon a heap of corn. 
How happens it that gizzard and bill go together, and that 
the gizzard is never found where there are teeth ? 

It is a curious problem for the artist to contrive a way of 
locomotion for those animals who have no feet, but a design- 
ing mind, in realit}^, has secured that which would puzzle 
the most ingenious to conceive of. Reptiles reciprocally 
shorten and lengthen the body by means of the joint action 
of strings and rings, or longitudinal and annular fibers. 

" Contraction and expansion," says Paxton, " is the mode 
of progression in worms, but not in reptiles. In the class of 
serpents, locomotion consists simply of repeated horizon- 
tal undulations, viz., flexion and extension. Thus, the head 
being the fixed point, the body and tail assume several 
curves; the curvatures are straightened, and thus the animal 
advances with serpentine motion. By alternating it moves 
forward at each step nearly the length of the whole body, 
the ribs having nothing to do with locomotion unless as 
affording a fulcrum for the muscles." 



CHAPTER YIII. 



THE SENSES. 



The senses are to be looked upon as the instruments of 
the mind. They are the tools with which the mind in a 
material organism works. The senses are also most inti- 
mately connected with the nervous system. Through the 
medium of the nerves the senses peculiarly act. Observe, 
then, the intricate relationship which the senses sustain to 
the nerves, and the nerves to the mind. Whenever w^e 
hear a sound, or perceive an object, three things are neces- 
sary: the senses, the nerves, and the mind. Thus, while w^e 
are able to trace some of the steps by which the nervous 
system acts, through the agency of the senses, we are wholly 
incompetent to understand anything of the deep mystery of 
the connection of the nerves with animal life and mind. 
From the effects produced, we know that nerves are not 
mind, any more than mind is the live senses. Thus, with 
three distinct agencies, material and immaterial, we have to 
do with the external world. How could any principle of 
generation, or law^ of nature, ever produce three agencies so 
intimately connected together and yet so distinct from each 
other ? Mechanism so profoundl}^ adapted to the external 
world, and so wonderfully associated with mind ! Observe 
that the world Avithin and the world without are so adapted 
to each other that, in a healthy state of the material organ- 
ism, our mental ideas exactly correspond with the actual 
realities of things. Ingenious philosophy has disputed this; 
but all the laws of common sense and human belief never 
for a moment have questioned this great truth. When we 
see a great mountain, and climb its lofty summit, our mental 
idea of an actual mountain, and not an imaginary one, gives 
as the precise truth of a positive outward existence of this 
(^6) 



THE SENSES. 77 

mountain, of which the ideal conception is the faithful pic- 
ture. Thus, by the most clear law of our nature, the senses, 
as exercised in their appropriate sphere, with opportunity for 
action and healthy condition of the nervous system, never 
can deceive us. Millions may be ignorant of the adjustment 
of these instruments to the external world; they may be able 
to describe nothing of the actual mechanism and the mu- 
tual dependence of one sense upon another, and yet there 
is not one mind capable of intelligent thought that knows 
not and feels that the senses are precisely adjusted to the 
world without, that their mechanism is the most elaborate, 
and such as cannot be imitated by the highest stretch of hu- 
man ingenuity. All can tell the use of the microscope, or 
the telescope, even if few can give a good description of 
them. All know that these instruments are the work of 
intelligence ; but when we contemplate the senses, we con- 
sider not dead mechanism, not merely living mechanism, 
but mechanism in connection with the mind, that may well 
be called thinking mechanism. Here is a step to show a de- 
signing^ God, far in advance of the common argument of a 
watch, with the wheels in motion, so celebrated in the 
masterly treatise of Paley. It is because these instruments 
of the senses feel and taste and hear and smell and see. It 
is because these senses, in their connection with, mind, in- 
troduce us into the glorious harmonies of the universe, and 
open up the majestic movements of countless worlds, and 
give the consciousness of the deep beauty of nature, that we 
see so clearly the proof of a God. 

" What is termed the structure of the organs of sense," 
says Sir Charles Bell, *^ is that apparatus by which the ex- 
ternal impression is convej^ed in words, and by which its 
force is concentrated on the extremity of the nerve. The 
mechanism by which their external organs are suited to 
their offices is highly interesting; it serves to show (in a 
way that is level to our comprehension as most resembling 
things of human contrivance) the design with which the 
fabric is constructed. Thus the eye is so seated and so 
formed as to embrace the greatest possible field of vision. 



78 THE SENSES. 

We can understand the happy effects of the convexity of the 
transparent cornea, the influence of the humors of various 
densities acting like an achromatic telescope; we can admire 
the precision with which the rays of light are concentrated 
on the retina, and the beautiful provision for enlarging or 
diminishing the pencil of light in proportion to its intensity ; 
but all this explains nothing in respect to the perception that 
is excited in the mind by the impulse on the extremity of 
the nerve. In like manner in the complex apparatus of the 
eye, we see how this organ is formed, with reference to a 
double course of impressions, as they come through the 
solids, or through the body, and as the}' come through the 
atmosphere; we comprehend how the undulations and vi- 
brations of the air are collected and concentrated ; how they 
are directed through the intricate passages of the bone, to a 
fluid in which the nerve of hearing is suspended ; and we 
see how at last that nerve is moved, but we can comprehend 
nothing more from the study of the external organ of 
hearing." 

It is not necessary to enter into a description in detail of 
the separate senses of the body. So many and accurate 
have been the illustrations by the anatomist of the senses, 
that it would be doing the greatest injustice to the senses to 
give a hasty sketch of them. For the purpose of our ar- 
gument, it is quite enough to state facts which all admit. Of 
all the senses, that of the eye presents itself as the most elab- 
orate work of art. Protected by a bony socket, with its three 
humors, its transparent cornea, its concave retina, and moved 
by six muscles in every direction needed, with a power of 
adjusting itself to near or distant objects, it shows itself pre- 
cisely adapted to the rays of light, and all the diversit}' of 
spheres in which it is called to act. Iso matter what may be 
the peculiarity shown in the elements of air, earth, or water, 
the eyes of all animals are exactly adapted to the wants of 
every creature. Thus the eagle, that soars in the air, has 
an eye unlike that of man, and yet neither could exchange 
places without the greatest detriment. The eye of the fish 
is useless out of the element of water; but in that element 



THE SENSES. 79 

subserving all the demands of the fishy race. In those ex- 
treme circumstances where the eye is not needed, we do 
not find the eye. Thus eyeless fish are taken from the dark 
waters of the Mammoth Cave of Kentucky. Here was a 
sphere where no eye was wanted, for in the perpetual ab- 
sence of light the eye is useless. Could it be chance that 
made some fish eyeless and other fish w^ith eyes? Is there 
not as much intelligence seen in adapting circumstances to 
the eye as in the making of the eye itself? The precision 
with which objects and colors are delineated upon the retina 
is very wonderful. Thus the retina of the eye is a constant 
and ever-changing panorama of the outward world, with all 
its varied scenery. 

" Could a painter," says Dr. Dick, " after a long series of 
ingenious efibrts, delineate the extensive landscape now 
before me on a piece of paper not exceeding the size of 
a silver sixpence, so that every object might be as distinctly 
seen iu its proper shape and color as it now appears when I 
survey the scene around me, he would be incomparably 
superior to all the masters of his art that ever went before 
him. This efl:ect, which far transcends the utmost efibrts of 
human genius, is accomplished in a moment in millions of 
instances by the hand of nature, or, in other words, by 'the 
finger of God.' All the objects I am now surveying, com- 
prehending an extent of a thousand square miles, are accu- 
rately delineated in the bottom of my eye on a space less 
than half an inch in diameter.'' 

Volumes could be written upon the five senses — of sight, 
hearing, touch, taste, and smelling — in their relation to the 
external world, and the theme not be exhausted. If through 
the eye, as an instrument of the body, such necessities are 
relieved and such pleasure secured ; if in relation to man 
such ideas are awakened by this miracle of art, equally true 
is it that the other senses perform offices as pleasant and 
essential to the welfare of the body. Take away hearing, 
and what a void is made in human existence ! Take away 
touch or taste, and what a blank is made in the happiness 
of creatures! By the senses the world without us is brought 



80 THE SENSES. 

into intimate sympathy with the world within us. The 
senses unite us to both. Upon the mode of their union im- 
penetrable mystery rests. But one truth is clear : the senses 
are only instruments of the body. They do not constitute 
in themselves any of the phenomena comprehended in the 
language, sight, hearing, touch, taste, and smelling. Back 
of the nerves lies that mysterious principle called animal 
life, in connection with the instinct and the mind; here re- 
sides the true seat of the senses. The greatest wonder of 
all is that instinct and mind, as bound up in animal life, can 
bring, with these instruments, the world without us into such 
intimate sympathy with the internal part of our nature. 
Thus the bird that warbles his little song, the ocean with its 
myriads of fish, the deer bounding over the plain, the savage 
lion, the entombed remains of the denizens of far-distant 
CDOchs of time, and, above all, man speak of God. 

*' The smallest dust which floats upon the wind 
Bears the strong impress of the eternal mind; 
In mystery round it, subtle forces roll ; 
And gravitation binds and guides the whole. 
In every sand before the tempest hurled 
• Lie locked the powers which regulate a world, 

And from each atom human thought may rise 
With might to pierce the mysteries of the skies; 
To try each force which rules the mighty plan 
Of moving planets, or of breathing man; 
And from the sacred wonders of each sod 
Evoke the truths, and learn the power of God." 



CHAPTER IX. 



LIFE AND INSTINCT. 



Life has been defined by Stahl to be *'the condition by 
which a body resists a natural tendency to chemical changes, 
such as putrefaction." Humboldt says living bodies are 
"those which, notwithstanding the constant operation of 
causes tending to change their form, are limited by a certain 
inward -power from undergoing such changes." Kant defines 
life "as an internal faculty, producing change, motion, and 
action." Bichat's definition is, " life is the sum of the func- 
tions by which death is resisted." Schmidt says, "life is the 
activity of matter according to laws of organization." 

Life by materialists is the same as organization, or is con- 
founded with it. But is there no difference between a dead 
man and a live one ? And yet the organization after death 
is the same in the one case as in the other. But how different 
the one from the other ! Life is something superadded to 
organization ; a perfectly distinct power. The one is only 
mechanism ; the other is the mysterious force that makes the 
mechanism go through with its revolutions. The machine 
is good for nothing without some power applied to set it in 
motion, ^ow, life is the power that moves all the wheels of 
the animal economy. It is the mysterious agency which, with 
unintermittent force, daily propels the workmanship of the 
artist. Consequently, a living body reveals far more dis- 
tinctly the power of some great architect than a dead body. 
Observe this peculiarity in all living organisms. It is con- 
stant change and constant motion : unlike inorganic sub- 
stances, the condition of existence is ceaseless activity. Sleep 
may suspend some of the action of the body; but not for a 
moment does the blood cease to flow, or the heart to beat, 
or the inhaling or the exhaling of air. The laboratory 
within is ever in constant activity. "What is it that thus 

6 (81) 



82 LIFE AND INSTINCT. 

keeps up the circulation of the blood, or the breathing of 
air ? It is the animal life. Here, then, do we see the con- 
stant play of a force that, with untiring energy, sets in daily 
movement all the mechanism of man. Here we see the gen- 
eration of new bodies ; the wonderful principle of compensa- 
tion, by which when a bone is broken, when a wound in the 
flesh is inflicted, nature has ever in store a new material to 
supply the loss or waste of the old. A new bone forms over 
the fracture, new flesh speedily restores the old, and thus is 
the body seen not only capable of introducing types of simi- 
lar organization, but of repairing the waste or iujury inflicted 
upon the old. IS'ow, life is the direct opposite of chemical 
afiinity : it holds while the body lives ; wars with those chemi- 
cal laws that are seen in inorganic substances. Here are two 
forces showing themselves in the human body : that of life 
and that of chemical afiinity and change. Yet the latter is 
restricted to its proper sphere as long as life continues ; when 
that ends, chemical laws begin their work of change and dis- 
solution. If, now, there is no power independent of the 
animal organization, why is it that the first germs of animal 
life, with no appearance of an elaborate mechanism, with not 
the slightest indication of its subsequent state, should by 
their own inherent agency give birth not only to the com- 
plicated machinery of the body, but the mysterious energy of 
life ? There is not the slightest plausibility in the reasoning 
that confounds life with organization, and organization with 
the first germs of animals. If the earliest germs of animals 
reveal not one trace of mechanism ; if the elaborate tissue 
of bones, nerves, muscles, veins, and arteries is the work 
of a subsequent period, then this cannot be true. Equally 
certain is it that life and organization are twa distinct things. 
How came the principle of life to incorporate itself with the 
human mechanism without a divine agency ? Animal life is 
a secret force, a mysterious power, but it is not an intelligent 
force or a reasoning power. It is not mind, it is not instinct, 
it has nothing in it that corresponds with thought. It is an 
undefined agency that works after its own peculiar laws. It 
has its distinct sphere of movement; and yet how valueless 



LIFE AND INSTINCT. 83 

the body without life I How soon does its beautiful mechanism 
return to ruin without this force applied to preserve it ! TVhat 
is the body without life to animate it ! We esteem the me- 
chanism of inorganic substances, even if the distribution of 
force makes them useless. But the dead mechanism of the 
body, how fearful it is ! Life, then, is a principle as indispen- 
sable for the existence of all animals as the body itself. All 
the amazing variety of instruments that the body presents 
only make more deplorable the ruin when the grand agency 
of life has departed. But if life is such, did it come by 
chance into the body ? If the seat of life, its mode of exer- 
cise, its commencement, is an unscrutable mystery, is there 
any doubt of the foct that life itself owes its origin to the 
mind of an infinitely wise God? We judge of the proof of 
design and adaptation by the intricacy and multiplicity of 
the instruments that bring it about. We consider the more 
artistic the machine, the more refined the different parts, the 
more evidence there is of a contriving mind. If, then, me- 
chanism evinces contrivance, does not mechanism, instinct 
with life, show far more a contriving mind ? When we con- 
sider the vast array of instruments, all useless without life, 
should we not be more impressed with the agency of God, 
when the great wheel that turns all the lesser ones begins to 
move, and there goes on in full power the complicated econ- 
omy of physical existence? But life in animals without instinct 
is not of itself sufficient for continued existence. Instinct 
comes in as a mysterious force imparted by some foreign 
agent. While life is the condition of all animal existence, 
instinct is the condition necessary to make life of any ser- 
vice. We see in animals not merely living mechanism, but 
this mechanism directed by instinct, enabling every creatare 
to fill the sphere of its being. Instinct is to the external 
world what animal life is to the body ; that which adapts the 
body to that which is essential for continued being. Xo ani- 
mal could live but a short time destitute of instinct, because 
instinct is indispensable as the preserver and guide of animal 
life. It stands as the ever-watchful sentinel over the princi- 
ple of life in the body. While the sphere of life is the body, 
the sphere of instinct is the external world, ever adapting the 



84 LIFE AND INSTINCT. 

animal life to the conditions of tlie world without. Thus, 
while life keeps the mechanism of the body in due order and 
preservation, instinct comes in to adapt this mechanism to 
the outward relations of the body. Life, in its agency, is 
universal ; instinct is particular. The reign of life is inter- 
nal ; instinct is external. The one is uniform in its action, 
the other is diversified in its agency. But instinct is distin- 
guished from mind, in that it has no trace of reason or con- 
science. Instinct never thinks : it acts. It is a mysterious 
faculty implanted to subserve certain indispensable ends in 
creation. Animals must live ; they must be able to provide 
for the wants of their offspring, or all animal existence would 
cease. Now, instinct is given to attain with unerring cer- 
tainty the indispensable ends of animal life. In many re- 
spects we see in it a marked diff-erence from-the human mind. 
In the first place, instinct is incapable of improvement. It 
exists as perfect in animals in one age as in another. Cen- 
turies neither alter it nor improve it. The bee is as wise now 
as a thousand years ago. The ant builds no better houses 
now than when first created. The nest that the bird pro- 
vides for her young is precisely alike, so far as material and 
dexterity is concerned, at one period as at another. There 
is no such thing as improvement in instinct: however it 
may develop itself in each species of animals, it is always pre- 
cisely the same. But another peculiarity is seen in instinct 
to distinguish it from reason. Instinct jumps at one bound 
into perfection : it is as good in the first stages of it as the 
last. As soon as it can fairly develop itself, it is of its kind 
perfect for the end designed. Thus, the }- oung duck takes as 
readily to the water as the old duck. The young beaver 
appears as wise in architecture as the old beaver. The young 
bee fabricates a cell with as much geometrical precision as 
the old bee. The first efforts of instinct are as well directed 
as the last. How dififerent from reason ! Feebler in its com- 
mencement than instinct, it gradually expands, grows more 
perfect with the flight of time, and in its highest maturity 
looks upward with longing eyes to yet nobler heights of ex- 
cellence ! But instinct also is extremely limited in its range; 
it only takes in few ends. It never goes out of a prescribed 



LIFE AND INSTINCT. . 85 

circle, l^ot more uniformly do the planets move in their des- 
tined circuits, than does instinct move in its allotted sphere. 
Another peculiarity of instinct is, that it bears the clearest 
possible mark of a foreign agency. The accuracy of instinct 
is an imparted accuracy ; some infinitely higher power than 
the animal gives instinct. How can it be otherwise ? Does 
a person believe that the young crocodile, that tallies to the 
water as soon as it leaves the egg, has any thought or design 
about water ? — that the bee, which builds a cell more perfect 
than the art of man can imitate, does so as the result of study 
or of experience ? — that the nest of the bird is fashioned by 
reason ? Does it enter the head of a man that what human 
reason or experience blunders in, animal thought perfects 
itself in ? 'No I Instinct is a mysterious power communi- 
cated by God, that, blindly, yet with absolute certainty, impels 
the animal to certain wise ends. The toil of learning may 
do for reason, but instinct has no time for it. Is there not 
then the highest proof of a designing mind, that what the 
animal left to itself would be utterly incapable of attaining 
unto by thought or experience, instinct secures immediately, 
and when in the highest degree needed ? Is it thought that 
leads the bird to meditate upon the wants of her future off- 
spring, and leave the habit of ceaseless activitj for the long, 
the inactive process of sitting upon her eggs ? Yet we see, 
without the slightest trace of reason, an end secured as wise 
as if the bird had been endowed with the intelligence of a 
Newton. How came the faculty of instinct in animals, if God 
did not give it ? Can it for a moment be presumed that the 
animal originated by any powers of his own instinct ? — 
that, w^ithout thought or any knowledge of his subsequent 
wants, he yet devised a faculty that in its appropriate sphere 
was better than the highest reason ? 

How came an animal without foresight to get up some- 
thing for certain ends better even than the most disciplined 
reason could secure? How came such matchless subser- 
viency to contain few but most wise ends, to come from a 
source where experience was impossible and thought alto- 
gether out of the question? Does not instinct, equally with 
life, reveal the agency of an infinite God? 



CHAPTER X. 

THE HUMAN BODY AND MIND, AND THE TESTIMONY OF HISTORY 
AND SCIENCE UPON THE ORIGIN OF MAN. 

Man is a complex machine, comprehending organized 
matter, life, and mind. The human form embodies a three- 
fold union, not more mysterious in principle than complex 
in construction. Alan himself is a miracle of art. It may 
appear a small thing to stand upon the feet; but the most 
perfect statue cannot thus do : the slightest wind will over- 
turn it ; and yet with what ease and safety a man stands 
erect or walks the earth ! Kow, then, the diiferent postures 
9f man are owing to the imperceptible yet constant balanc- 
ing of the body by the muscles. One of the hardest works 
of art is to make both sides of the bod}- and head alike, — one 
precisely resembling the other. And yet how uniform and 
exact the proportions of the human frame ! Of the millions 
who compose the human family, no two persons can be 
found having exactly the same features. Thus, w^hile in all 
essential respects there runs through the whole race one 
great principle of resemblance ; yet there is diversity of 
feature enough always to distinguish one man from another. 
Observe the regularity of the animal structure. While ex- 
ternally there is the most perfect resemblance in the limbs 
in opposite sides of the body, while there is exact correlation 
of parts, yet internally this is far from being the case. A 
line drawn down the middle of the breast divides the thorax 
into two, similar in all respects; yet the two sides inclose 
very different contents. The heart lies on the left side, and 
a lobe of lungs on the right, balancing each other neither in 
size nor shape. Thus the external proportion in this and 
other parts of the body does not arise from any equality in 
the shape or contents of the internal body. One great per- 
fection in the animal mass is j^cf-C^cige. Observe the variety 
and number of instruments all securely stowed away in the 
(86) 



THE HUMAX BODY AND MIND. 87 

most convenieut compass! Here at the center is the heart, 
pumping at the rate of eighty strokes in a minute ; here 
are two difierent sets of pipes, one carrying the blood from 
the heart, the other returning it to the heart ; here are the 
lungs distending and contracting their thousands of vesicles 
by constant reciprocation ; here is the powerful chemistry of 
the stomach, with the bowels silently propelling the changed 
aliments; here are the liver, the kidneys, the pancreas, the 
parotid, all performing their peculiar office ; here is the in- 
testinal canal, five times the length of the body, so important 
in the animal economy, securely protected by being knit to 
the edge of a broad, flat membrane, called the mesentery ; 
here is the brain, incased in bone, the spinal marrow so deli- 
cate, secured from injury by the wonderful mechanism that 
surrounds it. And yet with so many movements and offices, 
with such diversity of construction and position, such peculi- 
arities of exercise, this living mass of heterogeneous sub- 
stances and motions always keep in their respective spheres. 
Man, unconscious of the mechanism within, moves through 
life; day and night does he carry about a laborator}-, where 
nature performs her mysterious w^ork, and existence passes 
away through innumerable diversities of operation. Thus 
the body is a moving machinery, so compact, so beneficently 
arranged, that the flight of years and the changing seasons 
do but evince a stronger proof of an origin from an all-wise 
mind. Observe also the beauty of the body. An infinite 
taste, a refinement of art, transcending all description, has 
fashioned the human frame, has painted with hues more ex- 
pressive than the rainbow the face of man, throwing into 
every feature the passions of the soul, giving to every move- 
ment propriety srnd grace, and revealing in every lineament 
the impress of mind. Thus, if so decisive the evidence of 
design in the body of man, much more clear is that evidence 
in the soul or the intellect of man. It is man, as compounded 
of the material and the immaterial, that demonstrates the 
handiwork of God with absolute certainty. Give to matter 
all the powers you please, none so wild as to imagine it ever 
can originate will, perception, imagination, reason, con- 



88 THE HUMAN BODY AND MIND, 

science, and affection. These are the attributes alone of the 
mind; thej have no affinity, no likeness to the properties 
of matter. 

" Clay cannot cogitate," says Pelliug, "nor can any mov- 
ing wheel reason, nor can the most spirituous parts of the 
blood philosophize, nor can the finest motes that dance in the 
sun consult or deliberate; nor can that glorious and enliven- 
ing creature, the sun itself, entertain those meditations which 
bubble and spring out of one's mind ; nor can all the ma- 
terial parts of the world put together form those contrivances, 
desires, and affections which are the operations of the hu- 
man soul; and to suppose, as some pretenders to sense and wit 
do, that all these actions proceed from little restless atoms 
capering about in the head, and falling accidentally into 
various forms and contextures, doth argue rather that the 
brains of such men are infested with flies and nits, than that 
they understand anything of right reason and philosophy." 

Upon no one subject is history more agreed than in fixing 
some few thousand years ago a beginning to the human 
species. N'o nation so savage, none so dark as to believe 
that the human race existed from eternity. Consult all 
Roman or Grecian poetry, study the legends of all the sages 
of Eastern literature, investigate all the books of heathen 
philosophy, and among them all the one great fact is recog- 
nized, — the creation at some time of man. This fact, what- 
ever may be the obscurity or contradiction respecting the 
mode of it or the time, runs through all tradition, it inter- 
weaves itself in all ancient philosophy and poetry. That 
some thousand years ago man had an origin is recorded in 
the written and the unwritten language of all nations upon 
the face of the earth. The golden age of man, his once 
primeval innocence, with the brazen and iron age that suc- 
ceeded, is pictured forth in all the poetry and philosophy of 
the world, l^o matter how confused the notions in respect 
to the fall of man, most clearly is the fact made known of the 
existence of the first man. So far as the voice of history, 
sacred and profane, is concerned, we cannot doubt that there 
was a time when the human race had a beginning. Science 
unites her voice with history to confirm the fact of man's 



AND THE ORIGIN OF MAN. 89 

origin. The records of all investigations among the monu- 
ments of antiquity point to the central region of Asia, whence 
anciently proceeded the descendants of Shem, Ham, and 
Japheth. Here was the cradle of the human race, here origi- 
nated the three great streams of population from the three 
sons of i^oah. Tradition, even as the Bible, teaches us that 
the deluge destroyed a corrupt race of men, who were the 
descendants of that happy pair that once lived in a state of 
innocence. Science makes known to us that, among the re- 
mains of the extinct species of animals that lie entombed in 
the earth, there are no vestiges of man among the earliest 
species of fish, reptiles, birds, and quadrupeds. If man had 
existed from eternity, why so recent and late the records of 
his being? Why do we not at least find his remains among 
the earlier species of fish, birds, and quadrupeds ? So far 
as the investigations of geology go, they are all opposed to 
the eternity of the human race. Geology discloses to us the 
fact that the human remains are the last and the most 
recent, while other races of organized creatures existed be- 
fore. History and science testify to the comparatively recent 
origin of man. The Bible record of man's creation is con- 
firmed by history and science. If, then, we look to the 
origin of man simply as a fiict to be established by testi- 
mony, there will be found a weight of evidence that man 
came from the creative power of God vastly greater than we 
can adequately conceive of, so that not only the first link in 
the great chain of humanity, but every link in that chain, 
viewed separately or collectively, point to the infinite mind. 
*' Humanity proper," says Professor Tayler Lewis, " or the 
human proprium, did not grow^ was no work of nature, but 
had a divine, a supernatural, an instantaneous beginning. 
There was a time, a moment, when man, — a man, — the 
immus homo, began to be, who a moment before was not. 
There was one in whom humanity commenced, and from 
whom all subsequent humanity has been derived. There 
was one who first began to be a man, and this principium 
has its date from the first energizing of that higher life, 
which came from a direct inbreathing of the Almighty and 
Everlasting Father of Spirits." 



CHAPTEE XL 

COMPARATIYE PHYSIOLOGY, AND PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY. 

One of the most significant indications not only of design 
in the world, but of a constant superintending Providence, 
is the intimate relation which the inorganic kingdom sustains 
to the organic, and the adjustment of laws most opposite in 
their character to the general harmony of the system. The 
development theorj-, by ascribing all the inorganic and or- 
ganic changes to powers inherent in matter, and to a princi- 
ple of transmutation, by w^iich one species of vegetables or 
animals generates a different species, and all from a gradual 
development through great ages of time, has in it nothing 
that confirms it in nature. Geology reveals how untrue this 
theory is in the past ages of the world. Let us, then, as pe- 
culiarly revealing the superintendence of God, notice some 
of those minute but most important changes constantly 
going on in the world. As we direct our inquiries into the 
department of nature where are made known the first devel- 
opments of being, we are most forcibly impressed with the 
absurdity not only of a theory which denies distinct creations 
to distinct species, but wdiich, under the vague phraseology 
of general law, dispenses with the necessity of an overruling 
Providence. The microscope reveals to us the forms of the 
globules of blood in herbivorous and carnivorous animals. 
Xow these globules differ in form and number according to 
the cliaracter of the animal. In man, the globules are small 
and nearly circular ; the globules are larger and of an oblong 
spheroidal form in fishes and birds. The form is different 
and still larger in reptiles. The form of the globules of blood 
is also marked in the grand orders of the herbivorous and 
graminivorous animals. Upon this wholly arbitrary distinc- 
tion in the form and number of globules depends the vital 
(90) 



COMPARATIVE PHYSIOLOGY, ETC. 91 

energy. Should an animal be bled to syncope, and the blood 
be permitted to flow on, death will ensue ; but if the same 
kind of blood taken from another animal be injected into the 
veins, the animal, if not dead, will recover ; but the blood of 
the herbivorous animal cannot answer for injection into the 
carnivora. Thus while dissimilar globules have powder to 
rouse the animal for a short time, the animal cannot recover. 
Here we see in the rudimentary particles of the body a dis- 
tinction upon which life itself depends. If, then, according 
to the development theory, the blood had been transmitted 
from one animal to another of different species, the blood 
would have changed its primary character. In vegetable 
cells or utricles, there is the same diversity of form as in 
the globules of the blood. Thus the cells are oval, round, or 
lengthened, and sharpened at both ends, or they assume 
tube-like forms. 

" Observation," says M. Jussieu, " which proves the truth 
of theories, determines the contrarj^ on watching the devel- 
opment of a vessel. We do not find any one which, in its 
different phases, would have represented all the other kinds 
of vessels ; and the same thing may be said of cells. Remark, 
moreover, first, that in each part of a plant, such and such 
modifications of cells, of fibers, of vessels are found. TTe 
have, for instance, in certain places, unroUable tracheae, 
though in others we never meet wqth them; second, that in 
spite of the similarity of the chemical composition of the 
walls, that of their contents is quite different, and like the 
shape constant in appearance, and agreeing with the place 
which the cavity occupies in the vegetable. Thus, therefore, 
if all the elementary organs of vegetables commence their 
growth as utricles, among wdiich we cannot discover any ap- 
preciable difference, except in their form, it is no less true 
that each utricle is destined from the beginning to assume in 
its ulterior development such a form and no other ; or to 
elaborate such a substance and no other : it is not, therefore, 
the same organ." 

Most appropriately is it remarked by George Taylor, 
*' There must be something in the embryo which gives di- 



92 COMPARATIVE PHYSIOLOGY, 

rection to the individual growth, or there is an infinite power 
presiding over the development growth of each one. This 
position proves the immediate interposition, as well as the 
omnipresence of the supreme cause ; and the former estab- 
lishes the distinct and unchangeable character of each class. 
One of these positions must be correct ; and as both of them 
contradict the idea of transmutation or development, it is not 
important which one we force our antagonists to accept." 
Says Agassiz, " We know that one sort of an egg will only 
give rise to one sort of an animal, therefore we must admit 
that as an egg of one kind gives rise only to one sort of an 
animal, there must be an immaterial principle presiding 
over these changes, which is invariable in its nature, and is 
properly the cause of the whole process." 

Consider the harmony existing between the laws of heat 
and light and the vegetable kingdom. It has been proved 
that a ray of solar light contains several distinct principles; 
one portion represents color, another portion affects the tem- 
perature, while a third contains the chemical principle which 
is invisible, and has no influence on the thermometer. What 
agency does the action of these distinct principles of a ray of 
solar light perform in vegetation ? The British Association 
submitted the question to Mr. Hunt for investigation. In his 
report, he says that light transmitted through yellow glass 
has little or no influence upon the germination of seeds, as 
the chemical portion of the ray does not pass through that 
color. Every vegetable demands a proportion of all these 
principles, and cannot survive without a certain portion of 
these principles. Thus, germination, growth, and fructi- 
fication depend upon changes in the proportion of them. 
These changes are in harmony with the seasons. Says Mr. 
Hunt, " It is now an ascertained fact that the solar beam 
during spring contains a large amount of the actinic prin- 
ciple so necessary at that season for the germination of 
seeds and the development of buds. In summer there is a 
large proportion of the light-giving principle necessary for 
the formation of the woody parts of the plant. As autumn 
approaches, the calorific or heat-giving principles of the solar 



AND PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY. 93 

ray increase. This is necessary to harden the woody parts, 
and prepare them for the approaching winter. It is thus 
that the proportions of the different principles are changed 
with tlie seasons, and thus that vegetation is germinated, 
grown, and hardened by them." 

In looking upon the vegetable kingdom we liud that it 
subserves to man two great purposes: one that of food, 
clothing, and protection from the elements ; the other a 
chemical and medicinal end. We find every country and 
diversity of climate having its distinct order of vegetables. 
Those vegetables most needed are most abundant. Thus, 
the cereals most useful are cultivated as far north as the 
seventieth degree of latitude. In the tropics, the banana, 
date, yam, and bread-fruit trees are scattered over the whole 
tropical zone. We find that nature is one vast storehouse 
where are deposited everything necessar}- for the support 
of man. Unlimited provision is made to gratify the dif- 
ferent tastes of man. Ornament is consulted as much as 
utility. In the chemical composition of the animal and vege- 
table kingdom, we see a marked difference. The cellular 
mass of plants is composed of nearly equal parts of carbon, 
hydrogen, and oxygen ; but in animals, gelatine, composed 
of unequal parts of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, and oxygen, 
is the primary material. Vegetables in their growth absorb 
inorganic particles by the extremity of their roots ; animals 
feed upon organic particles ; and by the nervous and lymphatic 
vessels in the intestinal tube they absorb their nutriment. 
In animals and vegetables respiration is altogether different : 
that of animals is performed without intermission the whole 
of life ; while light is absolutely necessary for vegetables. 
Wide as may be the difference in respiration and nutrition in 
the vegetable and animal kingdom, the organic appai-atus is 
even greater which performs these functions. 

In the physical geography of the earth, we notice that a 
large proportion of the continental element lies north of the 
equator. The eastern hemisphere has a much larger area of 
land than the western. Its greatest expansion is from east 
to west, while the new continent has its greatest length from 



94 COMPARATIVE PHYSIOLOGY, ETC. 

north to south. The Dortheru continents contain nearly two- 
thirds of the continental area, or about twenty-two and a half 
millions of square miles, while the southern contain sixteen 
and a third millions only. The northern continents are more 
indented and articulated, and therefore present in their con- 
tours more variety : they are also possessed of inland seas 
and gulfs; while the southern are more compact, have fewer 
indentations, and no inland seas. The northern continents 
are almost entirely in the temperate zones; while the southern 
are confined to the tropical and warm temperate zones. The 
mountains, according to their arrangements, materially affect 
the temperature of the continental climates. In the old 
world the principal chains follow^ the direction of the paral- 
lels, while in the new world they take the direction of the 
meridian. The law, as in the case of the major axis, seems 
to be entirely different in the eastern and western continents. 
"The highest elevation of the continental masses," says 
George Taylor, " following the direction of the mountain 
chains, are uniformly located on the sides of the continents, 
and not as might be expected at the center. The mountains 
descend gradually towards the Atlantic and frozen oceans; 
while their slopes are rapid and precipitous towards the 
Pacific and Indian oceans." 

" If the order were reversed," says Professor Guyot, " and 
the elevation of the lands went on increasing toward the 
north, the most civilized half of the globe at the present 
would be a frozen and uninhabited desert." 

Thus we find, even in the arrangement of the continents, 
and the position of the mountain ranges, a clear indication 
of divine wisdom and goodness. 



CHAPTER XII. 

MEANIXa OF THE TERMS NATURE AND CHANCE. 

So often and so loosely is the word nature used, so fre- 
quently is it misapplied, that its true import is deserving of 
careful consideration. Mature comprehends the universe, 
but yet is used with more peculiar reference to the objects 
that come under our immediate notice in the visible world. 
But we cannot speak of the powers of nature abstracted from 
the individual objects of nature. Xature, as the universe, 
with which in its largest acceptation it is synonymous, is 
made up of parts, and these parts, however related to each 
other, are comprised in an iniinite variety of objects. Thus, 
to speak of nature in the aggregate as something distinct from 
the objects of nature is most absurd, and yet the powers of 
nature are often spoken of as if something resided in nature as 
an original cause of all things. When adaptation and design 
are admitted, we often hear the phrase, nature itself is the cause. 
But why thus delude the mind with language so wanting in 
intelligence and sense ? Why suffer the mind to be deceived 
with the jingle of words absolutely without meaning ? Is 
there no distinction between the iirst cause and second 
causes ? Is there no difference between original power and 
imparted power? Do we speak of a self-active machine be- 
cause we see the wheels move ? Do we confound a landscape 
revealing a hundred tints of beauty upon the canvas with 
the painter of that canvas ? Do we admire the artistic work 
of the statue, and lose sight of the genius that fashioned it ? 
Nature has numberless objects, animate and inanimate ; it has 
infinite diversities of collocation and adjustment, adaptations 
of the utmost beauty and usefulness. If, commencing with 
the objects of the inanimate world, we ask how came these 
objects in existence, is it any solution to the question to say 

(95) 



96 MEANING OF THE TERMS 

nature brought them in 9 But nature is only an assemblage of 
objects. It is no explanation to say that the whole intro- 
duced the separate parts, that the aggregate of all things 
produced each separate member. The question is, how 
did each separate object, animate and inanimate, come into 
being? ^ot how did the whole come into being. The 
question is, what was the cause, the efficient author of the 
particular objects that sum up the whole ? Now to shift the 
proof from the part to the whole is poor logic, and worse 
sense. If there is one truth more self-evident than any other, 
it is, that existence does not prove self-creation. Because / 
a?/i, it is no proof that therefore I made myself. Because the 
world is, that does not prove its self-creation. But the very 
phrase self-creation involves an absurdity. That which is not, 
cannot engender itself. I could not create myself before I 
had an existence, even had I the power afterwards of creat- 
ing a world. When once it is seen that existing things have 
a beginning, then the cause of that beginning must reside 
out of itself. The question then is, did the separate objects 
that go to make up nature have a beginning ? If so, then 
nature in no sense was the first great cause. Nature itself 
must be accounted for by a power out of itself, and distinct 
from itself As, by separating the several parts that go to 
make up nature, we reduce it to nothing, so when we account 
for the separate things in nature, we cannot go for their cause 
to the great whole. An aggregate of different things is no 
cause of those things. Numberless second causes cannot 
do away with the first cause. Thus, when nature is properly 
viewed, we see the absurdity of making it the cause of the 
objects that go to make it up. As well may a person enter 
some great.palace, and, viewing all around its wonders of art, 
its noble proportions, its lofty walls, its stones of polished 
marble, its well-formed windows, its walls decorated with 
the richest paintings, and its numerous contrivances of 
comfort and elegance, say the palace is the cause of all these 
things. Is now the reasoning any less sophistical that con- 
founds nature with the author of nature ? Is it not absurd 
to make nature the cause of its separate parts, and lose sight 



NATURE AND CHANCE, 97 

of an intelligent cause that created the whole, and each 
member of the whole ? 

So much has been said of chance and of the fortuitous 
concourse of atoms, that in considering the personal agency 
of God, it would be well to give these phrases a passing 
notice. Whatever may be our view of the agency of God, 
or his personal manifestation of power in the works of nature, 
one thing is certain, — the great law that every event must 
have a cause embraces all actual events, all changes, all 
modifications of matter, and all begun existences. Adopt 
either the hypothesis of no cause but God, or that of the first 
cause and second causes, and in either case we are com- 
pelled to the belief that there is no such thing as chance or 
a fortuitous concourse of atoms; if by either supposition we 
mean causeless events or things, why is the word chance 
used at all ? It is simply a term appropriate to human 
ignorance. When we speak of anything taking place by 
chance, all that is meant is, the cause is unknown or the 
thing or event not directly the object of our purpose. But 
because in relation to man in the restricted sphere of his 
mind and his thoughts we do not see many things or events 
the objects of human will or thought, yet everything is 
caused as really as the most designed object of human work- 
manship. An artist may chisel out a statue, but the chips of 
marble that lie like useless rubbish at his side, the very dust 
that floats in the air are caused as much as the statue itself. 
Where, then, is the difi'erence ? Simply here, — in the work- 
manship of the statuary the main object of thought and pur- 
pose is the due proportion of the body chiseled out of the 
marble : that we say is designed, while the dust and broken 
fragments of marble are not designed. But in what sense 
are the}" not designed? Simply in the sense of the statue 
itself. But as necessary to that statue they are designed ; 
they form the balance of design, or, so to speak, the residuum 
of design. They are remotely objects of purpose and desire, 
as the statue is directly an object of purpose. So far as 
cause goes they are as really caused as the most perfect work- 
manship of man. But if chance is so restricted in its meaning 

7 



98 MEANING OF TERMS NATURE AND CHANCE. 

when applied to man, and if in no proper definition of the 
term there can be such a thing as chance, more true is it in re- 
lation to God that there can be no chance. The mind of God 
is unlimited, his wisdom and knowledge as boundless as the 
universe, his foresight extends to all events. Even the for- 
tuities of existence are as much under his control and 
knowledge as things that happen after the most regular and 
precise order. 

The far-reaching law of cause and effect reigns in the uni- 
verse of mind and matter. God alone is uncaused, for he 
alone is self-existent : he alone has no beginning or end. 
In him reside the infinite depths of all causes. Chance with 
God is impossible, for contingencies are as really under his 
knowledge and direction as certainties. Contingencies with 
God when he purposes are certainties. 



CHAPTER XIII. 



UNITY OF DESIGX IN NATURE. 



!N"ature reveals through her vast domain one divine unity 
of wisdom and goodness. Xot only the first truth of phi- 
losophy teaches us the absurdity of calling in more than one 
great cause for the formation of the universe, but the uni- 
verse itself carries with it the essential mark of divine one- 
ness of construction. Every separate province is intimately 
associated with the collective whole. Every part seems to be 
made after one great pattern, and the mighty aggregate, from 
the greatest to the least, appears to be tied together by one 
chain of Divine Providence. Dividing the universe into 
three parts, viz., that which pertains to matter, that which 
may be included under the endless developments of mind and 
instinct, and that which is comprised in the moral and ac- 
countable part of our nature, and there will be found running 
through the whole the clear trace of an origin from one infi- 
nite source. J^aturalists have often exercised their minds in 
investigating the great dependencies of one part of nature 
upon another; they have found that, remove one element 
from the atmosphere, or change the constitutional principles 
of water, or modify but a little the external appearance of our 
continents or mountains, or reverse their present locality, or 
alter the etherial combination of the solar ray, or remove any 
of the primary ingredients of the earth, or derange but ever 
so little the chemical properties of heat, and the result is ruin 
to man as he is now constituted. Changes that at first sight 
would appear unimportant, would soon propagate their influ- 
ence by a thousand channels of communication, until one wide 
derangement would afiect the whole. Thus, to change but a 
few degrees the relative position of the earth's axis, would 
work an entire difi^erence in the climate and condition of the 

(99) 



100 UNITY OF DESIGN IN NATURE. 

world. Tlius, if we look at the world we find air, heat, land, 
water, light, all having towards each other a relation so 
peculiar, that alter that relation in the least and the whole is 
permanently deranged. The collocations of matter, their 
adjustments that show so signally the wisdom of God, reveal 
also their oneness of design and origin, ^ot only does phi- 
losophy teach us that the supposition of more than one great 
cause is absurd and unnecessary, but all nature cries out 
against a plurality of self-existing and independent deities. 
No trace is there of such an absurdity in nature. Nature 
points us to one infinite God and there leaves us. A plu- 
rality of Gods must all have one design, or difterent designs. 
All must act in the same way, or difterently. If the latter 
were the case, nature would reveal herself one mighty scene 
of disorder and contradiction. The condition of nature would 
be abnormal, and all sensitive existence as now constituted 
would be impossible: but should the former supposition be 
correct, then nature would give the lie to herself, and every 
page of her records would reveal one systematic deception, 
since man would be compelled to believe in one God while in 
reality there was a plurality of Gods. Such an idea is to the 
last degree absurd. Search through all nature, and one vast 
chain of dependence runs through the whole. One all-per- 
vading unity is seen from the smallest to the greatest. Thus 
it will be seen that the universe is made up of innumerable 
parts all linked together; one great principle of gravitation 
reaches to the remotest star. In the minute, even as in the 
great objects of nature, there is seen the unity of God's work- 
manship. As we go through the animal kingdom we find 
that every species, every great genus carries throughout one 
uniform pattern. Thus so marked is the unity of design, 
that having made ourselves familiar with any one species of 
animals, we shall find our great end secured through all the 
diversities of this species. 

" Every organized individual," says Cuvier, " forms an 
entire system of its own, all the parts of which must mutually 
correspond and concur to produce a certain definite purpose, 
by reciprocal reaction, or by combining towards the same 



UNITY OF DESIGN IN NATURE. 101 

end. Hence none of these separate parts can change their 
forms without a corresponding change in the other parts of 
the same animal, and consequently each of their parts, taken 
separately, indicates all the other parts to which it has be- 
longed. Thus, if the viscera of an animal are so organized 
as to be fitted for the digestion of recent flesh only, it is also 
requisite that the jaws should be so constructed as to fit 
them for devouring prey; the claws must be constructed for 
seizing and tearing it to pieces; the teeth for cutting and 
dividing its flesh ; the entire system of the limbs or organs of 
motion for the pursuing and overtaking it ; and the organs 
of sense for discovering it at a distance. The shape and the 
structure of the teeth regulate the forms of the claws ; so 
that a claw, a shoulder-blade, a condyle, a leg or arm bone, 
or any other bone separately considered, enables us to dis- 
cover the description of teeth to which they have belonged; 
and so also reciprocally we may determine the forms of the 
other bones from the teeth. Thus, commencing an investi- 
gation by a careful survey of any one bone by itself, a per- 
son who is sufliciently master of the laws of organic struc-- 
ture may, as it were, reconstruct the whole animal to which 
that bone had belonged. The smallest fragments of bone, 
even the most apparently insignificant apophysis, possess to 
the class, order, genus, and species of the animal to which 
it belonged : insomuch that when we find merely the ex- 
tremity of a well-preserved bone, we are able by careful 
examination, assisted by analogy and exact comparison, to 
determine the species to which it once belonged, as certainly 
as if we had the entire animal before us." 

Thus it will be manifest that unity of design is seen through 
the whole animal kingdom. There is equally clear one 
mighty chain of dependence all centering in one end. The 
elements of earth, air, and water are indispensable for the 
vegetable kingdom, and these three great departments of 
nature are so adjusted to each other, and all so essential for 
the intellectual and moral development of man, that any 
change, however apparently small, in their relative position 
would most vitally affect the whole. So adjusted is one part 



102 UNITY OF DESIGN IN NATURE. 

of the world to another, and so connected is one world witli 
other worlds to their central sun, and so associated is one 
solar system with another, that it would seem that the whole 
universe, with all its countless worlds and revolutions, was 
constituted upon one mighty plan with a mutual connection 
so intimate that everything not only had its proper place, 
but nothing could be spared out of its place. Thus, be the 
catastrophes of nature ever so great, these are made to sub- 
serve purposes most wise, and even through the greatest 
confusion are ordained to bring forth order and beauty. 

But the unity of God is as clearly manifest in the intel- 
lectual and moral world. The world without us is exactly 
adapted to the world within us. If God was not wise and 
good, this never would have been so: if there were distinct 
and independent authors of nature, such harmony of the ex- 
ternal with the internal, such order and wise arrangement, 
such unity of end and means never could be expected. Not 
only would there be different plans, but discord in the plans ; 
not only would we see no unity of end, but great diversity of 
end; least of all should we see the outward world made to 
correspond so exactly with the internal world, so that each 
should so sympathize together and make both to act in such 
unison. The things that are objective are so bound up with 
the things subjective, that mutual concord in their normal 
state ever exists. Not more dependent is the body upon air, 
water, and food for life, than is the intellect and moral na- 
ture dependent upon the external world for development. 
Remove the senses that ally us with the world without, and 
what becomes of the mind and heart existing in an embodied 
condition in the world ? The partial derangement of the 
senses, or the loss of any one sense, shows to us clearly how 
greatly fettered the mind is in its exercise. Whether exist- 
ence upon the earth would be possible with all the senses 
removed is extremely questionable. Certainly, in such an 
abnormal state the mind would be of no benefit to the body, 
and all human life would be restricted to a very short time. 
Through the medium of the senses we are brought into inti- 
mate communion with the infinite developments of matter: 



UNITY OF DESIGN IN NATURE. 103 

we hear the countless modifications of sounds, we inhale the 
fragrance of flowers, we see the beauty of nature, we touch 
the smooth and the rough, we taste the sweet and the bitter ; 
but do we consider that upon which the senses are built ? 
Are we conscious of that mysterious union of the senses with 
the mind, by which so intimate a sympathy is kept up be- 
tween the external and the internal, the material and the im- 
material ? If unity of end, the oneness of one great plan is 
not here displayed, where is it displayed? That substances 
so opposite in their nature, so essentially diverse in their 
essence, should- yet associate together in an intimacy so great 
can be attributed only to one great design, revealing one 
mind unlimited in wisdom and goodness. Thus the unity of 
design in nature involves also the idea of the oneness of the 
first great cause of nature, and intelligently considered ex- 
poses the fallacy of an infinite series of causes and effects. 
Does not the idea of effect involve the idea of power ? Must 
not all power in action or effects have a commencement 
somewhere ? If a person should dream of an infinite chain 
of cause and eftect, no dreaming could do away with the fact 
that each link in that chain involves a supporting power 
somewhere. It is impossible to get rid of support by increas- 
ing to infinity the number of links in this supposed chain of 
cause and effect. The more links demanded for this chain, 
the greater ultimately must be the strength of the supporting 
power that holds the chain up. The mind is driven irre- 
sistibly to the conclusion of the absurdity of an infinite series 
of effects and causes, because the unity of design in nature 
not only points to the oneness of its great author, but shows, 
however incomprehensible God may be in himself, that yet 
he must be the first great cause, whose power, infinite in 
manifestation, holds up that chain of liuks surpassing in 
number all finite estimation. 

Our conclusion is the same if we consider especially those 
effects bearing the clear marks of adaptation and design. 
If one effect of contrivance cannot exist without a designing 
mind, certainly no number of effects, however augmented, 
could exist without such a mind. 



104 UNITY OF DESIGN IN NATURE. 

" Unity added to iniinity," says Pascal, " does not increase 
it any more than a foot measure increases an infinite space. 
"What is finite vanishes before that which is infinite, and 
becomes nothing. Thus does our understanding before God, 
and our righteousness before his righteousness." 

" We may certainly know there is a God without compre- 
hending what he is; and you ought by no means to conclude 
there is no God, because you cannot perfectly comprehend 
his nature." 



CHAPTER XIY. 

GENERAL HAPPINESS OF ANIMAL EXISTENCE, AND INTELLECTUAL 
AND MORAL ACTION REVEALING THE GOODNESS AND MERCY 
OF GOD. 

Life upon the whole is a scene of enjoyment. Animal 
existence is one of pleasure rather than pain. Happiness is 
the rule, while suffering is the exception. Animal existence 
is generally one long scene of happiness, not indeed uniform, 
not unattended with pain, but the proportion of suffering is 
to the amount of enjoyment but very small. The uneasiness 
or fear experienced is usually only enough to secure from 
greater evils. One thing is made to counteract another. If 
pain is long continued, it is small ; if violent, it is short. But 
freedom from suffering, and with it long enjoyment, is the 
condition of most of our existence. From the highest scale 
of animal life to the lowest we find that life has its pleasure. 
How does every day disclose new scenes of happiness for 
creatures ! How pleasantly glide the hours away of sensitive 
existence ! Moments of rapture may be few, but the serene 
current of quiet pleasure, how uniform, how great ! l^ight 
and day is given to us, — one for rest, the other for action. 
Our toils sweeten the repose of night, our rest invigorates us 
for the activity of the day. When we look upon some great 
city as the sun goes down in the skies, and the moon marches 
with noiseless step over the heavens, what keeps so many 
thousands in slumber so sweet, and then awakes them to the 
joys and duties of another day ? Why so uniform this suc- 
cession of activity and repose ? Why fly so swiftly the 
mighty hours ? Why do man and brute so unconsciously give 
way to rest? Is it not a peculiar mark of the divine good- 
ness that the wants of our nature so great are met with such 
uniformity ? As night brings with it repose for the exhausted 

(105) 



106 GENERAL HAPPINESS, ETC. 

bodj, and day returns with its active pleasures, do we not 
with every passing hour see new proof of the benevolence of 
God ? Could we conceive God thus kind if not good ? Does 
the mother carefully prepare a bed for her infant and smooth 
his pillow, and hush him to slumber with her lullaby song, 
unless she cares for her child ? Is her maternal solicitude no 
proof of her love ? And when a care inlinitely greater is 
exercised over us, and our hours of weakness are protected 
from a thousand dangers, and we are kept from the destruc- 
tion that wasteth at noonday, and the pestilence that walketh 
iu darkness, have we not high proof that God is good ? Re- 
member, man is dependent upon the author of his existence 
in a way that no creature is dependent upon another. De- 
pendence in the one is relative, but with God it is absolute, 
^ot less constant is it than intimate and peculiar. The crea- 
ture receives everything and gives nothing. Man is inlinitely 
in debt to God, while God owes not a farthing. An eternity 
cannot cancel man's obligations. We are constantly inclined 
to the error that possession of life gives a right to life. But 
how is this shown? Is not the existence of one hour of 
happiness a boon by the Creator? Is not the gift of one 
day of pleasure a greater bequest ? Is not the gift of a week, 
a month, a year of enjoyment a favor greater still? But if 
before existence it would be absurd to speak of a right to it, 
does its possession give a better title to it ? When we speak 
of the kindness of creatures, their benevolence, we speak of 
that which is relative, which must be restricted by a thou- 
sand qualifications, which is dependent in its exercise by 
innumerable contingencies ; but the benevolence of God is 
absolute, it gushes forth from a well of fathomless depth, 
from a fountain low down as the heart of God and vast as 
his own boundless nature. Thus the value of the benevo- 
lence of God is immeasurably enhanced, from the fact that it 
is to his creatures a mere gratuity. The creature basks 
under the sunshine of the divine benignity, while every ray 
is free and undeserved. Be the favors of God great or small, 
no creature can demand them as a right. If they come to 
him, they come as a gratuity that God may give or withhold. 



GENERAL HAPPINESS, ETC. 107 

But the goodness of God is also seen from the wide diffusion 
of happiness among creatures. This happiness is propor- 
tioned to their natures. If we take the scale of animal life, 
and, commencing with the bottom we ascend to the top, we 
find that existence is with the lowest up to the highest of 
creatures one uniform indication of the divine goodness. 
Who that observes the plav of life in the humblest of crea- 
tures that doubts the enjoyment of existence? In the 
sportive movements of the young of animals, is there not high 
evidence of pleasure ? When we see the eagle soaring far 
up in the air, or listen to the warbling of the little songster 
upon the bush, have we no proof of the goodness of God ? 
Why so universal the appearance of enjoyment ? AVliy do 
we find that — search throuo-h the varied orders of animal 
existence, investigate every species offish, or insect, or bird, 
or quadruped — their condition is one of pleasure rather than 
pain? Why is pain the rare exception, and enjoyment the 
rule of life? Why, from the ephemeral life of the insect of 
an hour to the protracted existence of a century of time, do 
we see every page of being written all over with the language 
of enjoyment? Does not this show that God loves the hap- 
piness of his creatures, and seeks to promote it ? Happiness 
may be divided into three kinds : that which is physical, 
mental, and moral. The body is the seat of the appetites 
and the involuntary action of the blood, the nerves, muscles, 
lungs, and heart. In our physical nature lie the senses, such 
as sight, hearing, taste, smell, and feeling. But the action of 
the appetites, the involuntary movement of blood, nerves, 
muscles, lungs, and heart might be painful rather than pleas- 
urable, and yet we live in the world. A constant uneasiness 
might attend the movement of the body and the gratification 
of our senses, and yet not so great as the love of life. Our 
physical existence might be barely endurable, without being 
altogether unendurable. We may have a constant experience 
of pain, and yet not so extreme as to supplant the fear of 
death. Such a state of existence is supposable, why not 
actual ? The reply is, the goodness of God. God loves the 
happiness of his creatures too well to make their life only 



108 GENERAL HAPPINESS, ETC. 

endurable. So far from our physical state being only the 
negation of pain, it is a positive source of enjoyment. It is 
a physical pleasure to gratify suitably the appetites. All 
animals love to see, and hear, and taste, and touch, and smell. 
All the senses are avenues of pleasure; but more than this, 
the involuntary action of the blood, nerves, muscles, and 
lungs have in their way happiness; their disorder is always 
attended with pain, their health}^ action with comfort. But 
why, unless God loves our happiness, should for the most 
part the physical state of creatures reveal the involuntary 
part of the body a condition of pleasant rather than painful 
action ? Why does the process of physical life show the har- 
monious action of a thousand springs never, as a rule, coming 
in collision with each other? Why our physical mechanism 
so seldom meeting ajar? Could we dissect our own bodies, 
and look at those vital cords that tie our bones together; 
could we watch the opening and shutting of millions of 
valves, the blood pouring through countless channels, the 
nerves permeating all over the system ; could the laboratory 
within be unveiled where the secret chemistry of nature 
works its miracles of assimilation ; could we study the mys- 
tery of animal growth, the process of nervous and muscular 
action, the separation of the oxj^gen from the air, the throwing 
oft' of the carbon, and the intricacies of countless movements, 
— should not our wonder of the wisdom of God be even sur- 
passed by the feeling of his unlimited goodness ? It is not the 
diversity of instruments in the body that is only to be admired, 
but the happy harmony of their action. It is not that they 
subserve the end of life alone, but that they secure so happy a 
life^ — a life, upon the whole, of great enjoyment ; a life closed 
indeed by death and made less desirable by the infirmities of 
age, but yet a life where the balance of pleasure far out- 
weighs the evil of pain. Is it conceivable that a being not 
good would adopt that course peculiar only to a benevolent 
God ? Would we not expect that misery would preponderate 
in our system with a God who rejoiced in evil, and made evil 
the end of his action ? Consider, that if benevolence in man 
shows itself by seeking the happiness rather than misery of 



GENERAL HAPPINESS, ETC. 109 

society, infinitely more does all nature shoTV that benevolence 
is the reigning principle in the heart of God. In a twofold 
way is this seen : first, by the conscience, whose earliest lesson, 
when unperverted, teaches us to hate wrong and love the 
good ; and then by the constant manifestation in the works 
of creation that happiness is loved more than misery. Thus, 
the benevolence of God is seen combining the two elements 
of justice and love — -justice to regulate the love, love to in- 
spire the justice ; the one supreme in the mind of God, the 
other in the heart of God. By justice the benevolence of 
God is revealed in its majesty, by love in its amiableness, — 
the one commands our esteem, the other our affection. 
Through the varied ranks of animal being, happiness has 
been seen to be the prevailing rule, while pain is only the 
exception. But when we come to consider our mental and 
moral organization there is more clearly seen the goodness 
of God. Wonderful as may be the mechanism of the body, 
the mechanism of mind and heart is more so. Two facts in 
respect to the soul of man all admit: the soul is mental 
and it is moral. B}^ mental is meant that the soul thinks 
and reasons; by moral, that it feels and discriminates right 
from wrong. But the condition of the soul as mental and 
moral presents a most important subject of inquiry. What 
is the uniform rule of mental and moral action ? What is 
the fruit of the suitable action of mind, conscience, and affec- 
tion ? Does enjoyment or pain arise from the proper exer- 
cise of the mental and moral faculties given to us by God ? 
Remember, mental and moral action is restricted to a right 
exercise. We take into consideration alone the faculties of 
the soul, in their mental and moral action harmonizing 
together. We speak not of an unhealthy action, or the sepa- 
rate instruments of the soul in collision, but in harmony, and 
confined in their exercise to their own legitimate sphere. 
We affirm that happiness is the invariable fruit of right 
mental and moral action : no pleasures so great as the 
pleasures of thought and duty ; no satisfaction so sweet as the 
approbation of conscience, the glow of moral worth, or the 
lofty joy of mental attainment. The highest happiness is 



110 GENERAL HAPPINESS, ETC. 

experienced when the will inspires the mind to noble effort, 
or the heart to deeds of love. The pleasures of sense are 
far inferior to the pleasures of thought, and of virtue. But 
great as may be the pleasures of thought, the pleasures of 
virtue are greater. As the moral part of man is the no- 
blest of his faculties, so its right action secures the deepest 
happiness. If, when we contemplate the pleasures of mind 
and virtue, we find that their legitimate exercise results in 
happiness, then is there not in this fact a high argument for 
the goodness of God ? If our physical nature is so con- 
structed as to afford great pleasure, and the exercise of mind 
and practice also of virtue conduces to our happiness, then 
have we not a threefold reason, even that derived from our 
physical, intellectual, and moral nature, for believing in the 
goodness of God? Commencing with conscience, it will be 
scon that the great element of divine goodness is justice; that 
it is not only the love of happiness, but the love of right with 
happiness that marks the character of God; that virtue is a 
higher end than enjoyment, — but if, with the highest end we 
find another end aimed at of vast importance ; if both right 
and happiness are made to go together as far as possible ; if 
we see that the exercise of mind and virtue is attended with 
great pleasure, that even apart from external influences, and 
without those outward rewards that generally await the right 
efforts of the mind and heart, there is an internal satisfaction 
that more than repays the toil and self-denial experienced, — 
then have we not the noblest proof of the goodness of God? 
God would be good, if the right exercise of our mental and 
moral faculties were attended only with that low degree of 
comfort that results from the absence of pain or uneasiness ; 
but when pleasures of the most exalted nature ensue from 
the suitable action of our higher faculties, then must we not 
believe that God, in thus bringing about the happiness of 
man, does indeed show that next to right he supremely loves 
the enjoyment of his creatures? \Yhen we consider the 
pleasures of thought, we find that they correspond to each 
development of thought. They are not the same with one 
kind of mental exercise as with another. The rapture of 



GENERAL HAPPINESS, ETC. HI 

the orator or poet in their movements of highest triumph is 
peculiar to that kind of mental effort ; but the man of science 
or the naturalist, who studies the structure of vegetables, or 
makes himself familiar with the history of the fishy tribes, the 
insect race, the bird or the quadruped ; the anatomist, who 
pries into the secrets of the physical structure ; or the artist, 
who pictures forth in marble or upon canvas his ideal of beauty 
— all these have their own peculiar pleasures ; pleasures that 
correspond to each sphere of mental labor. Xot more diver- 
sified are the kinds of thought, than the enjoyments that spriug 
from them. Every labor of mind brings wdth it its own re- 
ward. From the calm and tranquil pleasures that, like gentle 
streams pursue their noiseless course, to those more noble 
enjoyments that swell forth into mighty rivers, there is seen in 
the exercise of mind every degree and variety of enjoyment. 
The orator or poet may prefer his kind of happiness; but the 
man of science, the historian, or the artist will not exchange 
their pleasures for the former. Thus, not only is there the 
greatest diversity of mental gifts, but as wide a diversity of 
intellectual joys. But what language can do justice to the 
pleasures of virtue? Virtue, hke thought, has its high and 
low sphere ; like thought it has its endless diversity of exer- 
cise ; its throne is in the conscience. Conscience is not virtue, 
but conscience tells what virtue is. Conscience shows its in- 
herent right and worth ; virtue is the action of a pure 
disposition and noble spirit ; conscience the herald that 
proclaims its presence ; virtue is the homage of the heart 
to God ; conscience the faculty which esteems that homage ; 
virtue is the love of goodness ; conscience the approver of it. 
Virtue is obedience to law ; conscience that which judges the 
equity of law ; virtue is the heart's movement towards 
that which is morally beaytiful ; conscience the witness of 
that beauty ; virtue is the reflection of the image of God ; 
conscience the canvas upon which that image is portrayed. 
Thus, we see that the pleasures of virtue, springing directly 
from our moral nature, lead us at once to the recognition of 
the goodness of God. How good must be that being who thus 
makes the path of virtue so pleasant I How must God love 



112 GEXERAL HAPPINESS, ETC. 

moral excellence when he strews along the way of life roses 
of immortal beauty ! Is it not a high evidence of the love of 
God to us, that duty is made our highest happiness ? Is 
there not in the heart itself a fountain of joy that needs 
but the call of duty to make it send forth its living waters? 
If the exercise of mind is noble, is not that of virtue far more 
so? Consider the variety of pleasures that spring from the 
pursuit of virtue. They accord with the peculiar virtue ex- 
ercised. Is the virtue of patience called for? there is an 
internal composure whose satisfaction can be experienced, 
but not described. Is the virtue of courage practiced? it 
brings with it a feeling of great pleasure. Is compassion to 
the suffering, or the relief of the ftitherless and poor exer- 
cised ? then the purest joys are awakened in the soul. 
Whatever may be the class of virtues, each class has its own 
reward. ]^ot only do we see the greatest diversity in the 
pleasures of virtue, but we see those pleasures spontaneous 
and unforced. The will cannot create them where there is 
no virtue ; and the will cannot suppress them when they rise 
up in the heart. Man may counterfeit virtue, but he cannot 
the joy of virtue. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of 
thistles? Even thus is it with virtue. Its sweet fruit can 
never grow from the thorns and thistles of sin. But the 
goodness of God is also seen from the fact that the most im- 
perfect virtue is made to give some pleasure. !N"ot great 
virtues alone, but all virtues have their joys, — joys not de- 
pendent upon outward circumstances, not like wealth or 
honor, uncertain and soon passing away, but pleasures that are 
permanent as virtue itself. The outward world may vanish 
away, but the soul carries about with it a world of its own. 
But the highest evidence of the goodness of God is seen from 
a consideration of our state, sinful by nature. Goodness 
from God to moral agents who have abused their freedom by 
sin, who have fallen from perfect rectitude, is more than 
goodness : it is goodness bearing the impress of mercy, — 
goodness revealing itself by countless favors to the undeserv- 
ing and to the unthankful. Thus, all God's bounty to us ]^ 
the bounty of his mercy; the pleasures he grants are the 



GENERAL HAPPINESS, ETC. 113 

fruits of his forbearance and compassion. The goodness of 
God to US is the goodness of mercy, infinite as his own heart 
of love, and boundless as the wants of his erring children, — 
mercy, deep-flowing as a sea over a world of sin, tender as 
a mother's love for her infant, free as the air and divinely 
rich. 

" For so the light of the world in the morning of the crea- 
tion," says Jeremy Taylor, '' was spread abroad like a cur- 
tain, and dwelt nowhere, but filled the 'expansum' with a 
dissemination great as the unfoldings of the air's loose gar- 
ment, or the wilder fringes of the fire, without knots, or order, 
or combination, — but God gathered the beams in his hands, 
and united them into a globe of fire, and all the light of the 
world became the body of the sun ; and he lent some to his 
weaker sister that walks in the night and guides a traveler, 
and teaches him to distinguish a house from a river, or a 
rock from a plain field, so is the mercy of God, and it filled 
all that infinite distance and space that hath no measures 
but the wiirof God, until God, designing to communicate 
that excellency, and make it relative, created angels, that 
he might have persons capable of huge gifts, and men who 
he knew would need forgiveness, for so the angels, our elder 
brothers, dwelt forever in the house of their Father, and 
never broke his commandments; but we the younger, like 
prodigals, forsook our Father's house, and went into a strange 
country, and followed stranger courses, and spent the portion 
of our nature, and forfeited all our title to the family, and 
came to need another portion. For, ever since the fall of 
Adam, — who, like an unfortunate man, spent all that a 
wretched man could need, or a happy man could have, — our 
life is repentance, and forgiveness is all our portion ; and, 
though angels were objects of God's bounty, yet man only is 
in proper speaking, the object of his mercy; and the mercy 
which dwelt in an infinite circle became confined to a little 
ring, and dwelt here below till it hath carried all God's por- 
tion up to heaven, where it shall reign in glory upon our 
crowned heads forever and forever. But, for him that con- 
siders God's mercies, and dwells aw^hile in that depth, it is 



114 GENERAL HAPPINESS, ETiy. 

hard not to talk widely and without art, and order of dis- 
coursings. St. Peter talked, he knew not what, when he 
entered into a cloud with Jesus upon Mount Tabor, though 
it passed over him like the little curtains that ride upon the 
north wind and pass between the sun and us ; and, when we 
converse with a light greater than the sun, and taste a sweet- 
ness more delicious than the dew of heaven, and in our 
thoughts entertain the ravishments and harmony of that 
atonement which reconciles God to man, and man to felicity, 
it will be the more easily pardoned if we should be like per- 
sons that admire much and say but little ; and indeed we 
can but confess the glories of the Lord by dazzled eyes, and 
a stammering tongue, and a heart overcharged with the 
miracles of this infinity. " 



CHAPTEK XV. 

THE ESTHETIC NATURE OF MAX. 

The nature of man is not only intellectual and moral, it is 
also aesthetic. There is a principle of taste, of perception of 
the sublime and beautiful, even as of aifection, thought, or 
moral discrimination. But in analyzing the principle of the 
beautiful and the sublime in our nature, or the faculty of 
taste, a great difficulty presents itself in the impossibility of 
definition, or giving logical forms to our perceptions. The 
fact is, the principle of taste in the mind by which so great a 
pleasure is secured from the perception of beauty or sub- 
limity, is most intimately associated with the affections. The 
class of emotions that rise up in the mind when some object of 
great beauty or sublimity is presented, is so different from 
the intellectual apprehension of usefulness, that we at once 
decide in our minds that utility and beauty can never be 
confounded together. But what are the elements that enter 
into our idea of the beautiful and the sublime ? In general 
language, for only general language can be appropriate to the 
description of a faculty whose exercise is so subtle as to elude 
the power of delineation in numberless instances, we say that 
order, harmony, proportion, fitness, are included in our per- 
ceptions of that beautiful or sublime ; but the beautiful 
clearly differs from the sublime : greatness seems to belong to 
the sublime, while smallness is necessary to our idea of 
beauty. Thus, the language the ocean is sublime, but the 
rivulet gently winding its wa^^ through a meadow is beauti- 
ful. But the idea of the rugged or the precipitous also 
enters into our conception of the sublime, while the smooth 
and the gradual is with us essential to the perception of the 
beautiful. Thus, the deep ravine, the rushing of water over 
great rapids, the rugged sides of a high mountain, o^ive to us 

(115) 



116 THE ESTHETIC NATURE OF MAN. 

the emotion of the sublime ; but a smooth lawn, a delicate 
flower, a small hill clothed in verdure, we call beautiful. 
Fitness and proportion enter peculiarlj^ into our conception 
of that beautiful. Thus, we always believe the beauty of a 
body sensibly diminished, if a foot or hand or any member 
of it is missing. A house with everything in proportion we 
call beautiful, but variety and the unique is necessary to 
the idea of the sublime, ^ow nature, by presenting the 
greatest variety of objects, beautiful and sublime, directly re- 
veals itself to the sesthetic part of our constitution. The 
taste of man has a l)Oundless lield for exercise in nature. In 
these the development of the aesthetic part of our nature, and 
the affording to it so vast a variety of objects for its exercise, 
in making the world without us so adapted to the world 
of taste within us, there is high proof of the goodness and 
wisdom of God. The world is full of the beautiful and the 
sublime. Wherever man goes he finds the principle of taste 
within him directly appealed to. How powerful is the influ- 
ence of this principle in our nature, may be seen from the 
fact that a very large proportion of our enjoyments arise from 
its exercise. Thus, the perception of some object of sub- 
limity or beauty awakens at once pleasure in the mind; 
the contemplation of the deformed or the ugly awakens in 
us feelings of pain. Observe how early the principle of 
taste reveals itself! The child will be frightened by a 
homel}' face long before he manifests the marks of reason. 
Although the faculty of taste develops itself by exercise, and 
becomes in proportion to its cultivation more refined, yet it 
never in man, however degraded, appears to be altogether 
lost. There is that in our nature that loves at all times the 
beautiful and the sublime. We at all times feel what it is to 
look upon some vast mountain scenery, the ocean lashed by 
the angry wind into a tempest, and the quiet meadow-land, — 
the smooth flowing of a stream, or the flower opening its 
leaves to the sun. Thus, we can never lose in our minds the 
deep impressions of the beautiful and the sublime of nature. 
We ever associate that which we know to be essentially 
different, with our ideas of that which constitutes beauty or 



THE ESTHETIC NATURE OF MAN. 117 

sublimity. Thus, we pass from natural objects to moral ob- 
jects with rapid transition of mind, — we say virtues are beau- 
tiful or sublime ; a daughter's attention to her aged mother 
is beautiful ; a father's care for his child is beautiful ; a deed 
of lofty heroism or of manly courage is sublime ; virtue we 
paint always as beautiful ; great self-sacriiices for the good of 
others, we consider sublime. We never borrow from nature 
our idea of the deformed or ugly, and attach it to virtue. 
But vice we uniformly paint as ugly ; the features of crime 
we represent as hideous. Why do we find the external 
world so exactly adapted to the aesthetic part of our nature ? 
Why a correspondence so fitting to our constitution ? If 
God was not good, should w^e see so man}^ evidences to 
awaken in us pleasure from the sublime and beautiful of 
nature ? Action in the inorganic or organic kingdom, and 
especially great action, has in it peculiarly the sublime. Thus, 
the tempest in its energy, the lightning flash, the earthquake, 
all comprehend the sublime. The aesthetic part of our 
nature not only shows itself in the emotions of hope, joy, 
reverence, but also calls forth, at times, in the sublime the 
emotion of fear. Unknown power has always in itself more 
or less of fear; so also the dark and the obscure. But the 
beautiful combines more the element of the delicate and the 
feeble. Thus, fragility enters more into our conception of 
beauty, while strength into our perception of the sublime. 
We speak not of a flower as sublime, but beautiful. But the 
lion or war-horse we call sublime when putting forth their 
energies. Consider, also, the emotions of sublimity or 
beauty as awakened by music. Sublime music is very dif- 
ferent from beautiful music. Each kind of music borrows 
in sound the elements that enter into the appearance of ex- 
ternal objects. Thus, beautiful music has a soothing influ- 
ence, but sublime music awakens us, and calls forth the 
strength of our feelings. The beautiful is smooth and gentle, 
the sublime impetuous and rugged. The one is like the 
gradual slope of some green hill, the other the steep declivity 
of a mountain. The sublime and the beautiful enter deeply 
into nature, — nature in form, in sound, in color. How 



118 THE ESTHETIC NATURE OF MAN. ^ 

combined, yet complicated, are the avenues of pleasure that 
present themselves to the principle of taste ! What a diver- 
sity of enjoyment is opened up to man ! But there is some- 
thing worthy of careful attention, as connected with the 
sublime and the beautiful : it is the sympathy that exists be- 
tween the aesthetic part of our nature and the moral part of 
our nature. The one seems to love the company of the 
other. Other things being equal, a virtuous man has more 
pleasure, from the sublime and the beautiful, than a vicious 
man. Vice always appears to contract the sensibilities to 
that beautiful or sublime. Vice, while it hardens the affec- 
tions, seems to throw a veil over the beauties of nature. As 
virtue makes more reiined the moral feelings, so it peculiarly 
fits them for sympathy with the aesthetic part of our nature. 
But vice, by making gross and blunt the moral perceptions, 
incapacitates at the same time the taste for the appreciation 
of the beautiful and the sublime. As delineating the sym- 
pathy of the 8esthetic with the moral nature of man, how 
appropriately has Milton represented the happy pair in Para- 
dise uniting together in their hymn of praise to God ! 

"These are thy glorious works, Parent of good, 
Almignty ! thine this universal frame, 
Thus wondrous fair ; thyself how wondrous then, 
Unspeakable ! who sitt'st above these heavens, 
To us invisible, or dimly seen 
In these thy lowest works ; yet these declare 
Thy goodness beyond thought, and power divine. 
Speak, ye who best can tell, ye sons of light. 
Angels; for ye behold him, and with songs 
And choral sj-mphonies, day without night, 
Circle his throne rejoicing; ye in heaven. 
On earth join all ye creatures, to extoU 
Him first, him last, him midst, and without end. 
Fairest of stars, lost in the train of night, 
If better thou belong not to the dawn. 
Sure pledge of day that crown 'st the smiling morn 
With thy bright circlet, praise him in thy sphere, 
"While day arises, that sweet hour of prime. 
Thou sun, of this great world both eye and soul, 
Acknowledge him thy greater, sound his praise 
In tby eternal course, both when thou climb'st, 



TEE ESTHETIC NATURE OF MAN, 119 

And when high noon hast gained, and when thou fall'st. 

Moon, that now meet'st the orient sun, now fli'st, 

With the fixed stars, fixed in their orb that fiies ; 

And ye five other wandering fires that move 

In mystic dance not without song, resound 

His praise, who out of darkness called up light." 

The charms of poetry all arise from a happy exhibition of 
the beautiful and the sublime ; but the inspiration of the 
poet, the fire of genius that kindles in the eye of the painter 
or the sculptor, owe their exclusive origin to refinement of 
taste embodied in the execution. Xor is this different with 
the masters of music: music is the sublime and the beautiful 
embodied in sound. Observe, then, how diversified are the 
sources of happiness that arise from the development of the 
principle of taste ! The inspiration of poetry, painting, 
sculpture, and music, all reveal the goodness of that being 
who has constituted us with a nature susceptible of so much 
pleasure from the exercise of the principles of taste. In these, 
the mysterious sympathy shown between the moral and 
aesthetic parts of our nature, have we not a peculiar illustra- 
tion of the divine goodness ? AVould virtue appear to us so 
beautiful and sublime, and vice when seen so deformed and 
hateful, if God did not love the one and hate the other ? 
Would nature thus be presented to the aesthetic part of man, 
did not its great author embody in himself the highest 
beauty and sublimity ? 



CHAPTER XYI. 



THE IMAGINATION. 



One of the noblest faculties of man is the imagination ; 
but the imagination, by forming ideal pictures of the lovely 
and the grand, brings into constant exercise the principle 
of taste ; it creates over and over again in the mind those 
images of beauty and sublimity v^hich so powerfully influ- 
ence the heart. Thus, its agency is seen in imparting to the 
aesthetic part of our nature both refinement and strength, 
delicacy and power, so that the mind has a far more vivid 
sense of the objects of nature. Thus, we find a highly cul- 
tivated taste more or less associated with the imagination. 
Why is the imagination given to us unless it be to add vastly 
to our happiness, as well as to promote virtue in man ? 
Observe the external world as adapted to the exercise of the 
imagination. That which strikes us as most wonderful in 
nature is the exquisite fitness of the outward and visible, 
through the medium of the senses, to the internal and spir- 
itual. All nature would be a source of the highest wretch- 
edness was not this peculiar fitness of things observed. It is 
not only the adjustment of one faculty of the mind to an- 
other ; not only the nice balancing of natural laws so that 
the noblest order is made known ; but there is revealed the 
harmony of the world without us to the world within us, 
— a harmony that brings into exercise 'every faculty of the 
mind. Now the imagination finds in the external world an 
unlimited field for development. It can retire within its 
own castle, and bring before the mental vision those scenes 
of beauty and of grandeur that so delight the senses. It can 
recall the melody of music, whose sound long has passed 
from the ear, and create within itself new strains of vocal 
(120) 



THE IMAGINATION. 121 

harmony. It cau call up the features of a departed friend, 
and throw over them a more enchanting loveliness than ever 
was presented to the eye. It can upon the canvas of the 
mind paint the masterpiece of the studio with richer colors 
than ever heamed upon the artist from the wall. It can 
give in thought a nobler beauty than ever glowed in the 
creations of the chiseled marble. Thus the imagination has 
in it a mysterious powder of giving a vitality to the beautiful 
and the sublime of nature. Its loftiest exercise brings us 
into the deepest harmony with everything lovely and grand 
without us. It throws new charms over the dull routine of 
life, kindles high hope in the heart, and gives energy in all 
the pursuits of life. Does not the provision of such a faculty 
reveal the wisdom of an Infinite Being ? Would we wish to 
be deprived of it? Then childhood would lose its highest 
glow of beauty, — then youth would, like a scorched flower, 
droop in its aspirations of hope, — then manhood would falter 
in its arduous toil, — the energies of life would be sapped of 
more than half their strength. But it is not the external 
world only that presents a sphere for the imagination. It can, 
from the dusty leaves of history, from the traditions of past 
ages, from associations of the most diverse nature, create im- 
ages of beauty and sublimity. How impressive the language 
of Gray in his "Elegy written in a Country Church-yard !" 

' Can storied urn or animated bust 

Back to its mansion call the fleeting breath? 
Can Honor's voice provoke the silent dust, 

Or Flattery soothe the dull, cold ear of death? 
Perhaps in this neglected spot is laid 

Some heart once pregnant with celestial fire ; 
Hands that the rod of empire might have swayed. 

Or waked to ecstasy the living lyre. 
But knowledge to their eyes her humble page, 

Eich with the spoils of time, did ne'er unroll ; 
Chill Penury repressed their noble rage. 

And froze the genial current of the soul. 
Full many a gem of purest ray serene 

The dark unfathoraed caves of ocean bear; 
Full many a flower is born to blush unseen, 

And waste its sweetness on the desert air." 



122 THE IMAGINATION. 

The imagination is remarkable for its early development 
in the mind of genius. There seems to be in it something 
more purely etherial, more allied to the highest refinement 
of spirit than in the exercise of all the other faculties of the 
mind. Notice, in respect to the imagination, one marked 
peculiarity. Its earliest and purest development is often in 
the form of devotion to the supreme being. God, in his 
power, wisdom, and goodness, is a theme most congenial 
to its exercise. The imagination loves the boundless, the 
infinite. It readily ascends from nature to nature's God. It 
finds its noblest field for imagery in the unlimited and in- 
comprehensible. Thus, as the painter throws upon the 
canvas a shade of darkness to augment the beauty of his con- 
ceptions, so the veil of mystery thrown over the Deity gives 
a far higher flight to the wings of fancy. Great as may be 
the mystery of nature, the mystery of God is immeasurably 
greater. Thus the imagination finds in its contemplation of 
God, a theme boundless in its range as the universe. The 
universe itself, with God recognized, seems to be the reflec- 
tion of his character, — a mirror portraying his own image. 
Thus, the genius of Hebrew poetry is pervaded with the de- 
lineations of God. Thus, some of the earliest illustrations 
of poetic art have as their exclusive theme God. Thus, often 
the childhood of genius breaks forth in a hymn of praise to 
the Deity. Observe the language of the friendless boy, Chat 
terton, but eleven years old, who so early met wdth a melan- 
choly grave. 

" Almighty framer of the skies, 
O let our pure devotion rise 

Like incense in thy sight ! 
Wrapt in unpenetrable shade, 
The texture of our souls was made 

Till thy command gave light." 

Thus, we see that imagination enters not only early, but 
universally into all the creations of genius. What is our 
idea of the highest development of mind and the noblest 
efi[brts of thought, if it be not the actual realization, the em- 
bodiment in statuary, painting, or words of the ideal concep- 



THE IMAGIXATIOy. 123 

tions of beauty and sublimity, as made known in the imagi- 
nation ? Here is the sphere of genius : its last effort is to give 
permanence and living reality to others of the lovely and the 
grand, as first conceived of in the mind. But why does the 
imagination, in its exercise, secure so great pleasure? Why 
does it create in the mind a living fountain of enjoyment, or 
find a field so vast for its range, subjects so fitted for its cul- 
tivation, unless God is good, and desires to be worshiped in 
a manner suitable to his character and perfections ? The 
genius of Hebrew poetry is pervaded with the highest 
elements of imaginative power. David, Isaiah, and Ezekiel 
seem to have exhausted the storehouse of human thought in 
delineating the majestic, the awful, the sublime, the wonder- 
ful in God. Their minds, rising to the high themes of God's 
nature and manifestations, convey thoughts so peculiar that 
language itself staggers in utterance. Thus, poetic descrip- 
tions of nature and of God seem to differ, in that, while the 
former is more sensible and easy of delineation, the latter is 
vastly more profound, and enters more intimately into the 
deeps of the soul. The imagination revels in the beautiful 
and the sublime of nature, but it is overwhelmed in the con- 
sciousness of its littleness in the conception of God. The 
idea of nature comes with its own limitations into the soul, 
but the idea of God, the more clear in its vision the more it 
enlarges, yet humbles the spirit of man. Xature has its 
bounds to the imagination, even in its boundless variety, — 
but God is an ocean, not more fathomless in its deeps than 
inconceivably grand with that expansum where the horizon 
forever rises and sits upon its everlasting waters. Thus, we 
see why God would never permit an image of himself to be 
made even to please the objective mind of the Hebrew. The 
imagination was permitted to portray all the glories of na- 
ture, every semblance of imagery, and all moral duties ; and 
the great facts of prophecy were shadowed forth by rites 
and ceremonial pictures, surpassing in gorgeousness of de- 
lineation the highest efforts of the heathen world. But the 
imagination that dared to make an image of God, or picture 
forth by any material emblem the awful mystery of his per- 



124 THE IMAGINATION. 

sonality, was accursed. Sinai encircled itself in a chain of 
fire, warning every Israelite not to pass beyond the line that 
separates the finite from the infinite. Study the genius of 
Hebrew poetry, and the mind will be impressed with the 
submissiveness, the docility, the reverential homage of the 
imagination when contemplating God. It is altogether des- 
titute of that sensual limitation, that vicious alliance of the 
divine and the human that characterizes the theology of 
paganism. Thus, while the poets of heathenism invariably 
debase the idea of God, and its philosophers refine him away, 
the result is that one class merges into idolatry, and the other 
passes into atheism. The pagan imagination, with a two- 
edged sword, destroyed either divine personality or existence; 
but Hebrew fancy, controlled by inspiration, embodied the 
element of the human in God enough only to enlist the affec- 
tions, and the divine to sober the mind, so that the imagina- 
tion escaped alike the evil of atheism and idolatry. In 
speaking of the noble end for which the imagination was 
made, it is fitting to allude to its fearful perversion, and that 
debasement which makes it often a source of the greatest evil 
to man. The curse of most works upon poetry, fiction, and 
philosophy is just a heathenish imagination. The fancy 
made to observe the restraints of reason and virtue often 
rushes wild over hill and dale like the horse of Mazeppa, 
with the body of his master tied to it. Is it not most mourn- 
ful to see often sucli a defilement of a faculty that would, 
undepraved, subserve the highest pleasure and usefulness to 
man ! When we see swine wallowing in the mire, our dis- 
gust is relieved by the thought that swine were made for the 
dirt, otherwise they would not have bristles ; but how differ- 
ent our feelings in beholding the songster that warbles upon 
the bush, or man made in the image of God, lying down in 
the filth ! So of the imagination degraded in its office, the 
spectacle is more than disagreeable: it is revolting and un- 
natural. We are pained to think that what can soar so high, 
and hold converse with the angels, will make its bed where 
only the lowest of the brute creation should find a congenial 
home. 



CHAPTER XVII. 

COXSIDERATION OF ANGER AND SHAME, THE LOVE OF AMITY, OF 
SOCIETY, AND THE POSSESSION OF PROPERTY. 

There can be no donbt that the passion of anger may be 
divided into the instinctive and the deliberate. The one may 
be right in its exercise, while the other may be wrong. Thus, 
we find that the natural influence of anger is to remove fear 
from its possessor. It is seen through the whole animal crea- 
tion. It rises up in the nature when injury is experienced 
or threatened. Thus, we see the weak when attacked by the 
more strong exhibit instinctively^ anger. How the eye of the 
boy flashes forth the emotion of anger when willfully struck 
by a large one ! Injury awakens this feeling in the mind. 
Thus, not only do we experience this feeling when we sufler 
an unprovoked injury, but we feel resentment whenever we 
read or hear of atrocious injury in others. The principle of 
resentment at hurt or wrong done, is universally implanted 
in the mind of man. Thus, anger stands always a sentinel in 
the heart whenever power is abused. Why this passion so 
wide-spread in our nature? Why search through every grade 
of the animal kingdom, — do we see its developments where 
injury is threatened? Evidently because in the world it acts 
as a safeguard, as an indispensable protection under innume- 
rable circumstances. It disarms the strong of their greatest 
power, — it keeps watch over the feebleness of the weak, 
giving upon emergencies an unwonted power of defense. 
Thus, while fear is most useful at times to enable us to escape 
from anger, anger is equally serviceable to us often to meet 
it. The one inspires caution, the other courage. Most ap- 
propriately has Brown shown the value of this principle of 
our nature. 

" What should we think of the providence of nature, if 

(125) 



126 ANGER AND SHAME, 

when aggression was threatened against the weak and un- 
armed, at a distance from the aid of others, there were 
instantly and uniformly by the intervention of some wonder- 
working power to rush into the hands of the defenseless a 
sword, or other weapon of defense ? And yet this would be 
but a feeble assistance if compared with that which we re- 
ceive from the simple emotions which Heaven has caused to 
rush, as it were, into our mind for repelling every attack." 

Thus the principle of anger, in its instinctive exercise, is 
made by God to subserve the highest benefit, l^ature re- 
veals as truly the design of God to make it a weapon of 
defense, as if some immediate interposition of divine power 
was exhibited. The whole world declares its adaptation 
under suitable restraints for the purposes of life, and its 
indispensable use in the economy of nature. 

But the emotion of shame also subserves a most useful end, 
as the defense of modesty and a restraining power in the 
mind of the impure. Thus, this principle acts as a great wall 
of defense to society. Commencing so early in our nature 
it suppresses innumerable outbreaks of depravity. Its influ- 
ence being internal, it operates upon one side to check 
aggressions, and upon the other to defend from unlawful in- 
dulgence. Thus, within the mind it is an ever-present 
monitor of conduct, a vigilant sentinel upon the rights of 
moral purity. The ways in which the emotion of shame 
acts upon society are innumerable. Thus, often when other 
motives fail of making their influence eflrectual, shame comes 
in as a last resort, and saves from ruin where nobler senti- 
ments fail. How frequently is this principle seen in the con- 
dition of the individual, as securing an end of the greatest 
value ! How often are the multitude restrained from ex- 
cesses by this principle, that otherwise it would fall into ! 
The great power of shame is seen from the manner in which 
it touches upon the sensibility of pride, or the feeling of self- 
respect. Thus, when called into action it directly awakens 
emotions in the heart, that with silent yet resistless energy 
often controls the whole mind. History is full of the devel- 
opments of this principle, influencing even millions when cir- 



THE LOVE OF AMITY, ETC. 127 

cumstances powerfully call it forth. Thus, the shame of 
defeat in war is often the sole protection of the soldier. 
Thus, honor and shame operate as powerful incentives to 
action, — the former a grateful, the latter a humiliating emo- 
tion of the heart. One feeling is the reverse of the other, 
and yet neither can be spared in the complex machinery of 
our nature. 

There is a class of the affections indispensable in the 
economy of life, which reveal in a high degree divine skill 
and benevolence. We refer to the love of family, society, 
and the possession of property. Suppose, for a moment, the 
love of family, comprehending the affection of parents to their 
children, or children to their parents and each other, was 
unknown, — suppose this mighty principle obliterated, where 
would society be ? Where would the world be ? Society is 
made up of families, but what could keep families together 
with the absence of the principle of affection ? 

How could society stand the shock of the sundering of the 
million secret ties that bind parents to children, and children 
to parents ? Where would be the means of support to those 
too weak or too helpless to secure support for themselves ? 
Where would be the care of the strong for the weak, or 
those countless attentions that make up the everyday scenes 
of existence ? Look upon society ! the bond that keeps 
society together is a vastly stronger bond than civil govern- 
ment. It is the affection that reigns in the family circle, the 
principle that leads the individuals of a family to care for 
each other. Thus, within the family are seen the deepest 
sympathies. The circle of affection to be strong must be 
small : general philanthropy may do for the mass, — the im- 
pulse of mutual good will may subserve a most useful end to 
the multitude ; but the family demands something stronger 
than all this. It demands concentration of affection, not a dif- 
fusion of it. It demands a singleness of good will, not gen- 
eral philanthropy. The family to exist must have something 
direct, positive, and immediate in the affections. Love must 
show itself as self-sacrificing. The tie that binds the family 
in the strongest way together, binds also the State the 



128 ANGER AND SHAME, 

stronger together, for the family calls into constant exercise 
the principle of subordination, — there are learnt those lessons 
of obedience that give security to the State. But the affec- 
tion of the famil}' calls into constant exercise the principle of 
industry, of foresight, of disinterestedness, of kind and gen- 
erous sympathy. Thus, the mother forgets herself in her 
care for her infant, the father toils for his children, the chil- 
dren obey and become the support of their parents. Thus, 
the family is the nursery of the purest emotions of our na- 
ture. If its cares are great, its J03^s are greater. It brings 
into action the unselfish feelings of our nature. The small- 
ness of the family circle only makes it the stronger. While 
affection by general philanthropy is dissipated, by particular 
philanthropy it is concentrated, so that the family is best 
adapted for the nursery of virtue. It preserves from ruin 
millions of the human race. It throws a shield of defense, 
the best the world knows of, over the infancy and childhood 
of humanity, leading it up step by step into the power of self- 
preservation, so that the family affection is not only the sen- 
tinel that stands at the door of general dissoluteness, but the 
highest safety of society, keeping it from moral earthquakes 
and volcanoes, from tempests of enraged elements that other- 
wise would rend it into pieces, shatter the body politic into 
a thousand fragments, and light up all over the world funeral 
piles of ruin. God never saves the State by overlooking the 
family, — he gives that principle of affection that creates the 
subordination of the little circle of home, and then widens 
that circle to comprise the State. 

But the love of possession is also a strong principle im- 
planted by God to cement society together. Thus, we see the 
first care of society is to protect the rights of property, for the 
rights of property are essential for industry, perseverance, and 
foresight. Take away all security to property, and industry 
and all the energies of a State are destroyed. Poverty, want, 
ruin, come rapidly on ; consequently all government fences 
round the property of the individual with a strong wall. The 
love of possession may degenerate into avarice, — it may be 
abused like every other natural principle of our nature, — but 



TEE LOVE OF AMITY, ETC. 129 

God gave it for the wisest end, even to be next to the family 
circle the strongest cement of society. As property is diffused 
among the masses it leads to the fear of novel changes, and 
imparts a dread of revolutions, so that the middle class be- 
comes mighty and the extremes of society weak, so that 
permanence is given, and the love of mutual subordination 
strengthened. True liberty dies out with the great weaken- 
ing or dissolution of the ties of property. General insecurity 
is fatal to liberty. When there is no respect for the rights of 
property, society rushes into anarchy, and anarchy, to avoid a 
worse evil, rushes into despotism. Despotism, then, for self- 
defense, invokes the power of the sword, and the violence of 
war buries up in its gory bed the dearest rights of man. 

Thus, under whatever aspect we may regard the constitu- 
tion of man, we see in the workmanship of God the eternal 
impress of his wisdom and goodness. 

9 



CHAPTER XYIII. 

OMNISCIENCE, OMNIPRESENCE, AND SPIRITUALITY OF GOD. 

In respect to the omniscience and omnipresence of God, it 
need only be said that the mind can no more in the works of 
nature limit the presence or the observation of God, than 
the power or wisdom or beneficence of God. As the essence 
of God must be forever beyond the reach of our faculties, so 
must also the mode of the exercise of the attributes of God. 
Where there is the action of the power of God, there must be 
his presence, and where there is his presence there must be 
his observation. It is vain to speak of the attributes of God 
except in that popular language understood by all. We can 
know nothing of the attributes of God except from their 
manifestation, and from the exercise of reason and that light 
which comes to us from Kature and Revelation. From this 
we are led to the conviction that the action of the Deity in- 
cludes his presence, and his presence his perception. But 
how amazing is the idea of that great Being who is present 
wherever there is the work of his hands ! who sees all 
things in the wide universe ; whose mind, unlimited in 
thought, takes into one view all the myriads of worlds that 
people the immensity of space ! What boundless grandeur 
must belong to him who embraces within the ample range 
of his vision the countless revolutions of suns and planets ; 
who, undistracted with the diversity of his cares, can give an 
equal notice to the smallest as to the greatest of his works ! 
The mind of the creature is soon weary with thought, and 
the brightest genius feebly flutters in its upward flight; but 
the mind of God never tires, his eye never sleeps. There is 
no darkness with him. All is open as the day. The worm 
that crawls in the dust is not unobserved. The rustling of a 
forest leaf in the wind is heard as distinctly as the music of a 
(130) 



OMNISCIENCE, 03INIPEESENCE, ETC. OF GOD. 131 

choir of angels. Imperfection marks the creature, pe'rfection 
the Creator. 

^' The omnipresence of God," says Dewar, " is necessarily 
implied in his infinite perfection. If there be no perfection 
wanting in a being who is infinitely perfect, and if it be a 
perfection to be present everywhere, and at the same time ; 
to be present everywhere, not successively by motion, but 
without motion, then it follows that the all-perfect God is 
omnipresent, infinite in himself, what power is there without 
him to bound his nature and essence to time or space ; or 
can we conceive that he would voluntarily place any restraint 
on himself? Immutable in his being and perfections, it can- 
not be said of him, that there is any place in heaven, or in 
earth, or in the boundless void of space from which he is 
absent; or that he moves from one place to another. 
Almighty in his power, what is there to limit him in creating 
and in peopling many millions of worlds througb an eternity 
to come ? And must not he who forms be present in the 
formation of his works, which he makes, and continues to be 
present to direct and uphold them ? This was the induction of 
the Apostle when persuading the Athenians of the omnipres- 
ence of God. He is not far from every one of us, ' for in him 
we live, and move, and have our being.' ' If we have life, and 
breath, and all things, he from whom we receive them must 
be in us and around us.' ' We are placed on a theater on 
which we, and everything about us, are exhibiting the pres- 
ence of God in all the power and benignity of his nature ; 
and if we are not yet admitted into the place of his peculiar 
glory, we are allowed constantly to witness the excellence of 
his working, and the wisdom of his councils.' " 

The great idea that God is a spirit is the necessary deduc- 
tion from his omnipresence and omniscience. His infinite 
power and wisdom could not admit of that limitation included 
in the very essence of matter. All that we can know of the na- 
ture of God must be from the developments of that nature. 
But nature presents her proofs of design ; power is seen in her 
countless changes. The revolutions of myriads of worlds re- 
veal the amazing power of God. But how is the infinite to be 



132 OMNISCIENCE, OMNIPRESENCE, 

confined to matter ? Matter is finite : it is and must be limited 
in space. Matter is unintelligent : it thinks not nor reasons. 
Spiritualize nature as much as we please we can never im- 
part to it thought. Materialize mind as much as we please 
we cannot give to it divisibility, 'extension, form, weight, and 
color. Mind acts, matter is acted upon. To make God ma- 
terial, or compound him of mind and matter, is essentially to 
limit him in his very nature. It is to make him necessarily 
imperfect. If God be not in his nature spiritual, an infinite 
spirit, then he could not have unlimited power, he could not 
be present over his wide universe, nor could his knowledge 
extend to all events. Our most exalted idea of a substance 
is that it thinks and reasons. But when we look upon the 
substance of God as material, then we degrade God immeas- 
urably. To ascribe matter to God, however we may modify 
its nature or existence, must be infinitely unworthy of God. 
But the very idea of power in its noblest exercise precludes 
ascribing matter to God. God being self-existent must be 
an infinitely self-active and powerful being. Could God's 
power be manifest over the whole universe if it was limited 
to any material substance ? Could God be omnipresent if he 
was circumscribed to the sphere of matter? Can that which 
must be bounded by measurement and limited in space, be 
appropriate to the nature of God ? God must be the author 
of matter, or matter the author of God. But matter cannot 
be the author of God, for then it would be eternal ; then it 
would have a prior existence to God ; then that which is acted 
upon would originate that which acts ; then the limited and 
the finite would be superior to the unlimited and infinite ; 
then that which has no thought would be superior to that 
which thinks ; then the material would excel the spiritual ; 
then matter would be God, and God matter; then the idea 
of finite spirits would be absurd. If God was material there 
would be nothing that was not material. The fundamental 
distinction of soul and body would be lost; there could be no 
such thing as soul and body, and all thoughts would be only 
refined materialism. Thus all lofty and good ideas of God, 
all ideas coexistent with the phenomena of nature, make out 



AND SPIRITUALITY OF GOD. 133 

God to be spiritual, and the infinite source of all knowledge, 
wisdom, and power. We can never conceive of God as in 
any sense restricted in time or space. We cannot limit him 
in any of his attributes; especially his nature must be infi- 
nitely superior to all matter: mystery the most unexplained 
rests upon the origin of matter, but no obscurity upon the 
fact itself that God made matter, and that it is not a part of 
his nature. The omnipresence and omniscience of God both 
preclude the materiality of God, for the moment w^e think of 
God in any other light than as a spirit, everywhere present 
and possessed of all knowledge and power, then we set limits 
to God. Our idea of the perfection of God forcibly confirms 
the fact of his spirituality. The attributes of God are in 
their nature so peculiar and so wonderful that it is impossi- 
ble to think of God in his essence other than as an infinite 
spirit. Everything that carries with it the idea of inferiority 
must be carefully excluded from God. There is that in our 
deepest nature which teaches us there is something with- 
out us and above us; something self-caused and self-existent ; 
something that cannot be circumscribed in space, or compre- 
hended by finite thought; something that is independent of 
all other things, and upon whom all other things depend; 
something that is boundless in every direction, and unlimited 
in thought, feeling, purpose, and mind ; something that made 
all creatures and all worlds, and of which no language is ap- 
propriate except that embodied in the words, the Infinite and 
the Perfect 



CHAPTER XIX. 

THE EQUITY AXD BENEVOLENCE OF GOD SHOWN FROM THE 
MORAL CONSTITUTION OF MAN. 

What may be the voluntary perversion of the moral work- 
manship of God is altogether distinct from the fact as to what 
was that workmanship as it came from God. We are to con- 
sider not the debasement of man's moral nature, but the ac- 
tual condition of that nature bestowed by God. Suppose we 
are called to see the painting of some great artist : that paint- 
ing may be old, or defaced by careless usage, and yet from 
the lineaments that remain, although greatly imperfect, we 
may come to the conclusion that it was the creation of genius. 
In man's moral nature, injured as it may be b}^ sin, there is 
yet seen in conscience the workmanship of God. 

Let us, then, examine the nature of conscience ; let us see 
what is the work of our moral sensibilities, and then directly 
do we, from the character of the divine workmanship, come 
to the conclusion of his equity and benevolence. There are 
those who have confined the argument upon the benevolence 
of God alone, to the fact of the vast amount of happiness ex- 
isting in the world. Having in one scale weighed the misery 
existing, and in the other scale the happiness prevailing 
among the different creatures made by God, and found that 
misery was the exception and happiness the rule, they have 
therefore with good reason inferred the benevolence of God. 

But consider that duty, right, and not happiness is the great 
idea upon which we base the equity and benevolence of God. 
It is because what he has made is right, what he demands is 
duty, that chiefly we infer the divine goodness. When we 
enter upon the question of the amount of happiness exist- 
ing, the adaptation of the works of creation to produce 
pleasure, we do indeed find in these things a high proof of 
(134) 



THE EQUITY AND BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 135 

the benevolence of God. But yet miseiy exists, and tbe ob- 
jection presents itself of moral evil. To meet tbat objection 
we must stand upon different ground than that presented in 
the happiness theory, — we must go to the fundamental idea 
of virtue, beyond which we cannot- proceed farther, even to 
that wall of adamant spoken of b}^ Mackintosh, "which 
bounds human inquiry (and which has scarcely) ever been 
discovered by any adv^enturer, until he was roused by the 
shock which drove him back." What is that wall of ada- 
mant, where all discovery must stop, which isfthe foundation 
of all ethics, and even the immutable basis upon which divine 
law and authority rests ? Is it not the idea of right, of duty ? 
It is no adequate definition of virtue to say that it is useful, 
it produces happiness, it accords with the fitness of things, it 
is order, divine harmon^^, it is moral beauty. These are the 
fruits or the tendencies of virtue. The question presents itself, 
why is virtue useful ? Why does it produce happiness, or 
accovd with the fitness of things? Why does it engender 
order, divine harmon}", or moral beauty ? Why is virtue to 
be supremely loved and obeyed ? Why is its opposite ever 
to be rejected and worthy of hate? It is in the solutions to 
such a question that conscience comes in with an answer 
alike infallible and immutable. It does not say that virtue 
is to be loved and vice hated, simply because the one is 
useful and the other the reverse, — that the one represents 
order, fitness, and moral beauty, and the other engenders dis- 
order, contention, and deformity. There are reasons why it 
would be the part of wisdom in us to be virtuous and not 
vicious. But the fruits of a tree do not constitute the tree 
itself. Beyond these reasons, there is the ultimate reason, 
the wall of adamant that stops all farther inquiry, and makes 
known the last element of all ethics. Virtue is virtue because 
it is right; because conscience pronounce- upon it the approv- 
ing verdict of duty. Vice is vice because it is wrong, and con- 
science when it sees vice as vice declares it to be wrong. 
Farther than this we cannot go in our last analysis of virtue 
and vice ; here we reach the essential element in the nature 
of virtue and vice which eno:enders the fruit of usefulness or 



186 THE EQUITY AND 

uselessness, happiness or misery, order or disorder, beauty or 
deformity. The question then that is peculiarly to test the 
fact of the equity and benevolence of God is simply, what is 
the moral constitution of man ? not what is the moral consti- 
tution in its state as perverted by man, but what is his moral 
constitution as originally given by God ? What are those 
moral sensibilities as created in us by the Deity? There is a 
wide distinction between power or faculty granted b}- God, 
and the abuse of that power or faculty, i^o one would infer 
that a steam-engine dashing itself upon the rocks was 
made for this end. The construction of the steam-engine 
shows that its true sphere was the railroad, and that it was 
designed for the purpose of rapidity, yet safely conveying in 
cars passengers and merchandise over the road. Even in its 
greatest power of mischief by abuse, there is made known 
wisdom and benevolence in its construction. The abuse of 
the engine is not the end, but the perversion of the end for 
which it was made. So of our moral constitution : it shows 
the wisdom and benevolence of its great author, even when 
most fearfully perverted. All can see the use of a compass 
in the ship upon the wide ocean, and although by careless- 
ness that compass may prove a great source of mischief, yet 
the end for which it was made was beneficent. We right- 
fully then discriminate between a thing and its abuse, power 
and its perversion, faculty and its derangement. So in the 
consideration of the moral constitution of man : we must look 
away from its derangement by sin, to the thing itself; we 
must view it as it might be and should be, rather than as it 
appears in its ruin. Take the human body in the full tide of 
health and the same body prostrated by disease, and how 
mighty the contrast ! But who, in viewing the body loath- 
some with the ravages of a mortal distemper, the limbs use- 
less for service, the ear dull of hearing, the eye blind to the 
external world, and the clammy sweat of death gathering 
over the form of man, would say this was the end for which 
the senses were made ; this the purpose which is made 
known in the limbs ; this the use of the whole mechanism 
of the body ? IN'ot so. The derangement or dissolution of 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 137 

the animal economy was not the design of that economy ; the 
cessation of its use was not the use itself Death may be a 
necessary condition of animals in this world, and through sin 
in man it may and is wisel}^ ordained by God to befall the 
human race; but this is not the design or great end to be sub- 
served in the animal economy. So also by sin we see the 
moral constitution in disorder and ruin; but as made by God 
it reveals in the clearest light his equity and benevolence. 

Here is the conscience, God's own workmanship, in the 
heart of man as much as the intellect or the body. Does 
that conscience when it sees a thing to be virtuous approve 
of it ? Does the conscience command us to do what we feel 
to be duty, and as authoritatively demand that we should not 
commit sm, when sin is seen to be sin? The question is not. 
what conscience actually does do when abused, but simply 
what is the nature of conscience unperverted, — what are its 
decisions in a healthy state? We are to look upon con- 
science in its exercise just as we look upon a steam-engine 
or a compass ; we judge of the wisdom and beneficence of 
their workmanship simply by what the steam-engine or com- 
pass can or will do in their appropriate sphere. The disas- 
ters that will attend the wrong use of these instruments in 
no respect aflect the utility or wisdom of their construction. 

In the same way must we look to the conscience as reveal- 
ing the equity and benevolence of God. Some confound 
conscience with virtue. As well may a man confound the axe 
that cuts the wood with the wood itself. Virtue is an effect, 
conscience an instrument; virtue is good done, conscience 
that which urges to good and approves of it ; virtue is right 
action, conscience that which constitutes the faculty of right 
action. Thus, conscience and virtue stand related to each 
other as agent and action, instrument and effect. To see in 
conscience the evidence of the equity and benevolence of 
God, we must view it especially in what it is designed to do ; 
we must look upon it as an instrument made by God for the 
wisest end. Nothing is more mournful than to see the per- 
version of conscience, and yet the fact that in different persons 
its decisions are so diverse, is owing to the use of conscience 



138 THE EQUITY AND 

out of the appropriate conditions of its sphere. There is not 
one of the senses that will not deceive when abused in its 
exercise. The faculties of sight, hearing, taste, touch, and 
smelling will all he exercised under certain appropriate con- 
ditions. The senses as truly give to us wrong ideas of the 
external world out of their sphere, as thej never mislead us 
when exercised in their sphere. But does this fact ever lead 
us to underrate the value of the senses? Are we ever dis- 
posed to think them useless, because of the mistakes we often 
fall into by their wrong use? Because the senses are limited 
in their range of operation, do we therefore infer that God is 
not wise and good in giving to us the senses ? But the 
senses are only the instruments of the body, just as the con- 
science is the instrument of the soul. The difference is 
simply that the former is material while the latter is im- 
material. Consequently we find that conscience is a faculty 
exclusively pertaining to a moral agent, and if the abuse of 
the senses is no argument against the wisdom and benefi- 
cence of God in their creation, equally true is it that the 
perversions of conscience do not infringe upon the equity and 
the goodness of God. As we look in physics upon the senses 
as instruments, so also in ethics we must look upon the con- 
science. As in the former we can show wisdom and benefi- 
cence in God by their legitimate use, so also we can in the 
latter. The natural world reveals no more clearly the char- 
acter of God than the moral world. While nature throws 
light upon the natural attributes of God, so with truth it may 
be said that the moral constitution of man peculiarly displays 
the moral attributes of God. 

The peculiar prerogative of the conscience is that it does 
not look to the consequences of a thing, so much as the thing 
itself. The conscience does not say. Do such a thing because 
it is useful, but because it is right. Its language is not. Avoid 
such a thing becausse it engenders miserj^ but because it is 
wrong. It is the intellect that weighs in the balances conse- 
quences. The sphere of the conscience is restricted to the 
right and wrong of conduct. The conscience alone takes cog- 
nizance of the internal state of a moral agent. It is not the 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 139 

will of God that makes his own nature virtuous, but his na- 
ture that makes his will virtuous. Conscience in man, when 
uuperverted, is an indication of what is the moral character 
of God. As God's workmanship, it tells not so much what is 
the Divine will, as what more comprehensively is his moral 
character, including his nature and will. Can then there be 
a doubt that if the conscience approves of the right, when 
seen as such, and condemns the wrong, — if, even amid the 
ruins of our moral nature it speaks of dut}', of obligation, and 
enforces right by its own peculiar sanctions, that the great 
Author of conscience must himself approve of right and con- 
demn wrong ? What more conclusive evidence of the equity 
of God ? Has God implanted a law within the heart impera- 
tively demanding right action, and must not the maker of 
such a law himself supremely love moral excellence, and hate 
sin ? It is not said that conscience and virtue are the same : 
the fundamental distinction between the two has been seen; 
but here is the question, Does not conscience in man that tells 
him to be virtuous, that unperverted leads to it, that guides 
as an instrument, when not abused, to virtue, that approves 
of the right wherever seen, and rebukes for wrong whenever 
felt, — is not such a faculty a clear mark of the equity and 
goodness of its author ? Can we for a moment believe that 
the Deity gave man a moral nature that must condemn him- 
self, and compel him to despise the author of his existence ? 
Certainly there can be no supposition so absurd as that God 
would helie himself in his own work. Man's work and God's 
work are two things altogether different. Man's work may 
and does often cast reproach upon God, but God's work 
never. God never would give moral sensibilities that the 
more virtuous in man, the more they would lead to the 
contempt of their great author. As God can never hate him- 
self, so never can he hate or be hated by his own work apart 
from the abuse of that work. The essential idea to be dwelt 
upon in considering conscience is, not what conscience actually 
does do in its abuse, but simply Avhat conscience can do 
and would do when used as God meant it to be used. Unless 
this distinction in ethics is always kept in mind, the contem- 



140 THE EQUITY AND 

plation of conscience, as perverted in fallen nature, will be 
more likely to throw darkness than light upon the moral 
attributes of God. Great as may be the disorder in the 
natural world, as the consequence of sin, 3'et the impartial 
observer of human nature is compelled to admit a disorder 
vastly greater in the moral world, the effect of sin. 

In contemplating conscience, a great allowance must be 
made for sin, even as in mechanics the calculator of physical 
forces always leaves a wide margin for the law of friction. 
The distinctive element of sin has entered the moral world, 
and its worst power is seen in perverting and blinding the 
conscience. We do not see conscience in man as it is un- 
folded in angels; nor is it now in man, as it will be in man 
perfectly redeemed from the curse of sin ; but this fact has 
nothing to do with the question, Is not the equity and the 
benevolence of God shown from the moral constitution of 
man ? Is not the conscience which makes known the moral 
constitution of man an instrument in itself, as given by God, 
wise, and good, and just? When we discriminate between 
a thing and the abuse of a thing, then are we prepared suita- 
bly to view the goodness of God in granting to man a con- 
science. The conscience, in its proper exercise^ is the moral 
image of God. When the conscience tells us to do what is good 
and to avoid what is evil, when it approves of w^hat is right 
and condemns the wrong, it reveals as truly the Divine dis- 
position as if the Deity directly communicated his will by 
miracle. Let it be understood that conscience is simply 
spoken of as a natural faculty of the soul in its unperverted 
exercise. It is given by God for a specific end, as much as the 
eye, the hand, or the foot. The eye can see only right under 
the appropriate conditions of its exercise; the ear can hear 
only correctly when used in its true sphere; the hand or 
the foot have their suitable range of exercise. So of the con- 
science as a moral faculty of the soul ; it is to be looked upon 
exclusively in its decisions, under its own peculiar and ap- 
propriate conditions as constituted by God. Viewed in this 
light, it is no argument whatever against the equity of God 
and his goodness, that the conscience is often so wrong, and 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 141 

its exercise so fearfully perverted. The simple question in 
relation to the conscience is, what will it do when rightly 
used ? What are its decisions under appropriate and suitable 
conditions ? 

Let us, then, consider conscience in its nature, — let us ex- 
amine it as a law, a feeling, and a judge, — let us view it in its 
supremacy over our nature, and then may we read from its 
character and right exercise the clear proof of the moral ex- 
cellence of that Being who gave it to man. 

" The truth seems to be," says Sir James Mackintosh, 
*'that the moral sentiments, in their mature state, are a class 
of feelings, which have no other object but the mental disposi- 
tions leading to voluntary action, and the voluntary actions 
which flow from these dispositions. We are pleased with some 
dispositions and actions and displeased with others, in our- 
selves and our fellows. We desire to cultivate the dispositions, 
and to perform the actions, which we contemplate with satis- 
faction. These objects, like all those of human appetite or de- 
sire, are sought for their own sake. The peculiarity of these 
desires is, that their gratification requires the use of no means ; 
nothing (unless it be a volition) is interposed between the de- 
sire and the voluntary act. It is impossible, therefore, that 
these passions should undergo any change by transfer from 
the end to the means, as is the case with other practical 
principles. On the other hand, as soon as they are fixed on 
these ends, they cannot regard any farther object. When 
another passion prevails over them, the end of the moral is 
converted into a means of gratification. But volitions and 
actions are not themselves the ends, or last object in view of 
any other desire or aversion. ISTothing stands between the 
moral sentiments and their object. They are, as it were, in 
contact with the will. It is this sort of mental position, if 
the expression may be pardoned, that explains, or seems to 
explain, those characteristic properties which true philoso- 
phers ascribe to them, and which all reflecting men feel to 
belong to them. Being the only desires, aversions, senti- 
ments, or emotions which regard dispositions and actions, 
they yiecessarily extend to the whole character and conduct, — 



142 THE EQUITY AND 

among motives to action they alone are justly considered as 
universal." 

What, then, is that source of knowledge which tells us that 
man has a conscience, and for his conduct is worthy of ap- 
probation or disapprobation ? The reply is, consciousness. 
Do we not, through another medium than the observation of 
the senses, have the idea of right and wrong, the feeling of 
joy or love, of esteem or aversion ? Are we not perfectly 
persuaded of mental pleasure or pain, of the character of our 
motives and conduct as good or bad ? If so, then the reality 
of conscience is as certain as consciousness : the existence 
of our moral sensibilities is as true as the reality of our 
affections and intellect. Here, then, is seen the peculiar 
office of conscience. It is the regulator in man's heart, that 
is given by God to control his conduct. It is the instrument 
made by God to exercise a universal supremacy over the 
voluntary states of the mind. Its sphere of action is exclu- 
sively internal. The decision of conscience is upon the state 
of man as a moral agent. It is simply upon the question of 
right and wrong that it decides. 

" The supreme authority of conscience," says Dugald Stew- 
art, " is felt and acknowledged by the worst, no less than by 
the best of men ; for even they who have thrown off all 
hypocrisy with the world are at pains to conceal their real 
character from their own eyes. I^o man, even in soliloquy 
or private meditation, avowed to himself that he was a 
villain; nor do I believe that such a character as Joseph in 
the ' School for Scandal ' (who is introduced as reflecting 
coolly on his own knavery and baseness without any uneasi- 
ness but what arises from the dread of detection) ever existed 
in the world. Such men probably impose upon themselves 
fully as much as they do upon others." Says Lord Shaftes- 
bury, as quoted by Stewart, "We may defend villainy, and 
cry up folly before the world, but to appear fools, madmen, 
or varlets to ourselves^ and prove to our faces that we are 
really such, is insupportable. For so true a reverence has 
every one for himself when he comes clearly to appear before 
his close companion, that he had rather profess the vilest 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 143 

things of himself in open company than hear his character 
privately from his own mouth. So that we may readily from 
hence conclude that the chief interest of ambition, avarice, 
corruption, and every sly insinuating vice, is to prevent this 
interview and familiarity of discourse, which is consequent 
upon close retirement and inward recess." 

In considering the nature of conscience one most important 
question presents itself. What is the relation of the intellect 
to the moral sense? We can all of us see a vast difference 
between the perception of an intellectual truth and the feel- 
ing of obligation. In respect to the sensibility of right 
and wrong, the distinction is fundamental between this and 
the perception of the properties of a triangle, the knowledge 
of the working of a machine, or a demonstration in anatomy, 
or fact of history. The sphere of the intellect is to tell us 
what is true; that of the conscience is to inform us what is 
right, — the one is confined to knowledge, the other to moral 
obligation. The intellect instructs us what to do, the con- 
science how to do. Truth is the end of the one, duty of the 
other; nor can any sophistry confound knowledge and duty. 
The reasoning is one thing, the feeling of obligation is another. 
While the intellect is so distinct from the conscience, it yet 
sustains to it a most intimate relation. If the reasonins^ 
power originates perceptions or new intellectual views, and 
the conscience moral emotions or feelings of obligation, yet 
it is greatly aided and supported by the various powers of 
perception and comparison ; consequently the decisions of 
conscience must be according to the knowledge possessed or 
the light enjoyed. The same outward acts may have de- 
cisions altogether different from the different motives that 
may be known to influence the conduct. What the con- 
science looks at is the disposition of the mind, — the actual 
state of the heart that leads to overt action. Consequently 
its decisions must vary with the diverse degrees of knowl- 
edge, and be clear or obscure, weak or strong, just in pro- 
portion to the facilities possessed of attaining a correct 
knowledge. 

*' Probably everyone," says Professor Upham, "can say 



144 THE EQUITY AND 

with confidence that he is conscious of a difference in the 
moral emotions of approval and disapproval, and the mere 
intellectual perceptions of agreement and disagreement 
which are characteristic of reasoning. In the view of con- 
sciousness there can be no doubt that thej are regarded as 
entirely diverse in their nature, and as utterly incapable of 
being interchanged or identified with each other. The 
moral feeling is one thing, and the intellectual perception or 
suggestion involved, both in the processes and the result of 
reasoning, is another.. Although the reasoning power and 
the conscience, or the moral being, are thus distinct from 
each other in their nature, they are clearly connected in their 
relations, as has been intimated already', inasmuch as the 
intellect, particularly the ratiocinative or deductive part of it, 
is the formation or basis of moral action. We must know a 
thing, it must first be an object of perception, before we 
can take any moral cognizance of it; and this is not all, — the 
moral cognizance, as we have already had occasion to ex- 
plain, will conform itself with great precision to the intel- 
lectual cognizance — that is to say, it will take new ground 
in its decisions in conformity with new facts perceived. Con- 
sequently ^ve cannot rely perfectly on a moral decision which 
is founded on a premature or imperfect knowledge. The 
more carefully and judiciously we reason upon a subject, the 
more thoroughly we understand it in itself and its relations, 
the more confidently^ may we receive the estimate which the 
voice of conscience makes of its moral character." 

Thus, in contemplating the relation the intellect sustains 
to the conscience, we find that conscience makes the intellect 
to assist it as an instrument in its decisions. The intellect 
acts the part of an indispensable servant that never can be 
spared in the performance of its functions. The supremacy 
of conscience is seen, in that it makes tributary to it the in- 
tellect and the will, and exercises a universal sway over all 
the voluntary states of the mind. 

"There is a superior principle of reflection or conscience 
in every man," says Butler, " which distinguishes between 
the internal principles of the heart, as well as his external ac- 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 145 

tions, whicli passes judgment upon himself, and upon them 
pronounces determinately some actions to be in themselves 
just, right, good, others to be in themselves evil, v^'rong, un- 
just, Tvhich without being advised with, magisterially exists 
itself, and disapproves or condemns him the doer of them ac- 
cordingly, and which, if not forcibly stopped, naturally and 
always of course goes on to anticipate a higher and more 
effectual sentence, which shall second and affirm its own." 

Let us then consider conscience in its universality as a law, 
in its energy as a feeling, and in its greatness as a judge. 
In considering conscience as a law, we are to remember that, 
as a rule of divine origin, it is implanted as a first principle 
in the moral constitution by God himself. It is, therefore, 
that upon which the mind proceeds; that which directs the 
reason and the judgment ; that b}' which all that is praise- 
worthy or is blamable is estimated. Consequently as a law 
it is universal, and from which proceed our first lessons of 
right and wrong. Thus, in the words of Adam Smith, we 
say, "upon whatever we suppose that our moral faculties are 
founded, whether upon a certain modification of reason, upon 
an original instinct called moral sense, or on some other prin- 
ciple of our nature, it cannot be doubted that they are given 
us for the direction of our conduct in this life." So impressed 
even were the ancients who had not the light of Revelation 
to guide, with conscience as a rule, that Cicero in a well- 
known passage says: "Right reason is itself a law congenial 
to the feelings of nature, uniform, eternal, calling imperiously 
to our duty, and peremptorily prohibiting every violation of 
it." " 'N'or does it speak one language at Rome and another 
at Athens, varying from place to place, or from time to time ; 
but it addresses itself to all nations and to all ages, deriving 
its authority from the common sovereign of the universe, and 
carrying home its sanctions to ever\' heart by the inevitable 
punishment which it infiicts on transgressors." 

But we have a far his/her authoritvfor conscience as a law 
in the words of inspiration, for we read, "they w^ho have no 
law (that is, no written law) are a law unto themselves, which 
shows the law written in their hearts." Thus, we see how 

10 



146 THE EQUITY AND 

clearly defined is that faculty that makes us moral agents: 
our responsibility rests upon the fact, not only that God has 
given us a law revealed upon the pages of the Bible, but a 
law revealed upon the pages of the heart, enstamped with a 
Divine hand upon the very tablet of the soul. Thus we see 
that however defaced may be the impression of that law ; 
however perverted may be our moral sense ; however unsafe 
by our sins we may make the conscience as a sole guide; 
yet still that law remains, still in legible characters is it 
written upon the soul ; still, whether by our sins we make 
our conscience unenlightened, or unfaithful, or troubled, or 
hardened, that law, written in the heart, bears witness, and, 
amid its greatest perversions, is alike universal in its sanc- 
tions, and condemning in its abuse. Consequently we see 
the excellence of the moral nature as given to us by God, 
we see how^ noble, originally, is that constitution not depend- 
ent for its principle of duty upon the ever-varying outward 
relations of life. Here, within, does ever}^ man have a con- 
science which, if he has no higher revelation, is a law^ to him- 
self, a rule of duty in life bearing witness to his conduct, and 
which, however perverted, will not make those in the deep- 
est darkness of heathenism excusable for their sins, — a law 
springing from no human source, but coming direct from 
our Maker. 

Consider then conscience in its energy as a feeling. Con- 
science has to do not only with the reason, it is not only that 
which directs the mind, giving to it uniformity in its deci- 
sions, and making itself a rule of conduct universal as man. 
But conscience has also its seat in the emotional part of our 
nature. It is enthroned in the sensibilities, and thus has to 
do with every class of our affections. It is this sphere of 
conscience that gives to it an energy so great. Observe how 
soon conscience shows itself as supreme over the feelings. 
The words, ^' You ought to do so !" "I cannot bear to think 
of it !" or " I am pleased that I obey my father or mother !" 
" I am glad I did not hurt my brother, or sister, or school- 
mate !" are the first exclamations of childhood and youth: 
they come unbidden from the heart; they are the earliest 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 147 

words of our youngest years. But with the increase of age 
conscience displays also a mighty energy. By our perver- 
sions of duty we may have smothered its voice, or silenced 
the alarm-bell in our hearts, and yet we cannot, by our wills 
alone, control it; we cannot say. Thus far shall conscience go 
in its reproaches and no farther. !N^o human wisdom or might 
is able to extinguish in the heart its reproaches. It comes 
often to the mind like a thief in the night. It comes after 
the drunken scene of midnight revelry to the miserable suf- 
ferer, and adds a hundred reproaches to every pain that 
lacerates the body. It comes at times to the gay pleasure- 
seeker, and spoils all the merriment of the hour by its in- 
ward stings. It comes to the oppressor of the poor and 
helpless, and makes the heart to ache with its stern rebukes. 
Upon the palace walls of godless wealth it writes, with an 
invisible hand, the dread epitaph of its ruin. 

But the energy of conscience upon the sensibilities is seen 
peculiarly in cases of great crime, ^^hat but conscience in 
its reproaches is present to the murderer when he seeks to 
drown the remembrance of his sin in the intoxicating cup ! 
What but conscience is present to him whom remorse for 
some deep wrong drives to the madness of suicide ! Some- 
times the sea is troubled with angry waves, and the waters 
dash their white spray upon the rocks; sometimes the sky is 
dark with clouds, and the tempest-wind utters its dismal qv\ ; 
sometimes the rumblino* thunder is heard, and the lis^htnino; 
flashes its lurid light across the darkness. But these indica- 
tions of the strife of nature but faintly represent the higher 
strife that rages in the heart when conscience moves over the 
sea of human sensibility. There are times when conscience 
awakes to a more terrific energy, and flashes upon the soul 
with a more scorching light. There are times when the roar 
of the troubled waters is more fearful, and there gathers upon 
the sky a deeper darkness. The emotional part of our nature 
possesses in itself innumerable diversities of feeling. There is 
joy and sorrow and fear and hate and love; and yet each one 
of these master passions comes with an endless retinue of at- 
tendant sensibilities. We may as well attempt to count the 



148 THE EQUITF AND 

immber of the stars as that throng of emotions that pervade 
the souL Xow over these feelings conscience exercises an un- 
limited sway: her very throne is in the heart of human sen- 
sibility. Here is it that she acknowledges no superior. 

Having contemplated conscience in the painful emotions 
engendered by wrong conduct, let us look to conscience in 
the feelings of pleasure created by right conduct. Consider 
that God has implanted in man a conscience to be independ- 
ent of all outward circumstances, a rewarder of virtue. He 
has given a conscience for the purpose of bringing man into 
a state of peace and joy far superior to every external con- 
dition of happiness. Thus, if conscience by its influence 
over the sensibilities possesses in itself the elements of the 
highest wretchedness, it also has the secret of the noblest 
happiness. Who can describe the charm of its approval of 
some virtuous deed ? Who delineate the peace that it creates 
when its intimations of right are obeyed? Thus have we 
looked upon nature when the setting sun threw its light upon 
some landscape of surpassing beauty, — with tints of a thou- 
sand colors sky and water were reflected : the summer breeze 
wafted the sweet perfume of flowers, and gently did the 
w^arbling of the bird die upon the ear. Here Tvas nature's 
harmony, and her mighty energies for evil controlled by a 
law that subserved the richest pleasure and the noblest peace. 
Thus with conscience when at peace with itself, over man's 
nature in right conduct she exercises a nobler harmony than 
is seen in the external world. In the influence of the con- 
science upon the sensibilities in right conduct, we see the 
great reason of the happiness that virtue brings with it. The 
conscience in our nature is like a mirror: it reflects every- 
thing that passes over it. Let the conduct be wrong, and it 
reflects the moral deformity of the person himself. Let the 
conduct be right, and the moral beauty of that virtue is w4th 
equal faithfulness reflected. Thus the heart has within itself 
a mirror upon which, in vivid distinctness, is delineated everj' 
feature of our moral nature. 

But there is another element in conscience having its seat 
in the aflfections. That element consists in the mvsterious 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 149 

power possessed by conscience to throw all the sensibilities 
by sin into confusion, or unite them by virtue into harmony. 
The sweeter the music of a harp, the more painful the dis- 
cord when broken. The conscience of a good man is like 
sweet music, and every sensibility of the nature is made to 
give out a note of harmony ; while the sensibilities of a bad 
man by conscience are rudely jostled together, and every 
movement is that of discord. Thus is it that in wrong con- 
duct conscience creates so great uneasiness in the sensibili- 
ties Conscience rudely throw^s them into collision, — the 
passions are moved out of their appropriate sphere, and made 
to conflict with each other. Thus we see the meaning of 
the language, " The wicked are like the troubled sea that 
cannot rest." Conscience will not let the sensibilities rest, 
it makes its sharp note of discord to vibrate with rude vio- 
lence through the emotions, stirring them all up like a hive 
of bees broken in upon, — making war in every member, and 
bringing into hot pursuit every liend of mischief. It is in 
the sensibilities that its energy is peculiarly displayed. 

But conscience exerts over the sensibilities its hia,-hest in- 
fl.uence through the law of association. We must under- 
stand that law in order to see, in the stron<>'est lio:ht, the 
energy of conscience upon the emotions. Consider then the 
thoughts that are made to rise up in the mind through the 
influence of association. By this law past thoughts and deeds, 
through the medium of some striking incident or resem- 
blance, are presented to the mind. Thus, let a person, after 
years of absence, revisit the scenes of bis childhood, and tbe 
fiimiliar events of his early years will be brought to mind by 
the house in which he once lived, by the fields where once 
he roamed, by the running stream where once he played. 
Should his eye light upon the portrait of a brother, or sister, 
or mother, or father, or some aged relative long ago dead, 
the principle of association within will recall to mind things 
that had been before buried in forgetful n ess. The actions 
of his past life will come up before him in vivid distinctness. 
iSTow conscience makes use of the principle of association to 
impress its lessons most effectually upon the mind. It throws 



150 THE EQUITY AND 

II clear light upon the characters of our past history. Thus 
we see how the man of atrocious crime shuns the spot that 
once witnessed his sin. Thus we see how deeds of benevo- 
lence, and great self-sacrilice for the good of others, throw 
a spell of beauty over the local habitation that bore testi- 
mony to our virtue. 

It would seem as if conscience had in it the hiofhest ele- 
ments of our ha2:)piness or our misery. If this were not so, 
why the effort to harden it, or make it turn traitor to our 
welfare? The wicked man never works so hard as when he 
seeks to drown the reproaches of conscience, or make it give 
an erroneous decision. Before we commit a great sin, we seek 
by our sophistry to silence conscience, or compel it to give a 
perverted acquiescence. 

The most horrid tragedies of the French Revolution were 
dignified under the abused name. of law and equal rights. 
The worst excesses of despotism are justified by appealing 
to the necessity of preserving order. " Whom we hate we 
defame," is an adage as old as the world. It would appear 
as if tiie commission of wrong was more than half disrobed 
of its hateful n ess to the mind, when the mantle of a per- 
verted conscience had been thrown over it. How expressive 
the words, "But even their mind and conscience is defiled!" 
Thus do we see the heathen casting her infant into the Gan- 
ges, or throwing herself into the flame that consumes her 
dead husband. Thus do we read of Ravaillac glorying in his 
Clime, while a nation mourns over a murdered king. Thus 
do we hear of the stoic firmness of a Guy Fawkes, who was 
arrested before he had succeeded in blowing up with powder 
the Parliament and royal family of England. I^or is it only 
in great sins that we see the effort made, and often with suc- 
cess, in compelling conscience to a false decision. The every- 
day events of life show how careful men are to silence its 
reproaches, or justify by it their sins. 

Let us then consider conscience as a judge. "We do but 
half realize the power of conscience, unless we consider that 
in a good degree it possesses the attributes of a judge. We 
have viewed conscience in its universality as a law, and in 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 151 

its energy as a feeling, but when we come to view it in its 
judicial decisions we see most clearly what is comprehended 
in the word judgment The fact that now by our sins we have 
made our conscience blind, or hard, or in any way perverted 
it, in no respect authorizes the conclusion that always it will 
slumber, or never be in a different state. It is a faculty of 
the mind restricted in its exercise by the present knowledge 
possessed, and dependent in its decisions upon the amount 
of light enjoyed, and the circumstances under which it is 
called upon to utter its voice. Thus we see why the consciences 
of different persons are so varied, and why different decisions 
are made even upon the same acts. There are two states that 
give diversity to the decisions of conscience: the circum- 
stances without us, and those within us, — our external and 
internal condition. Everything to the eye looks differently 
upon a mountain to what it does in a valley, and yet the per- 
ception to the eye may be in its sphere as true in one condi- 
tion as in another. The inference then that change of cir- 
cumstances, internal or external, or both, will have a mighty 
influence in the decisions of conscience, is most clear. Who 
knows not the fact that there are hours when long-buried 
sins come, through the law of association, before the mind 
like on army of giants! It was conscience that spoiled all 
the pleasures of Belshazzar's feast, and made the knees of the 
guilty monarch shake at the handwriting upon the wall. It 
was conscience that made Felix tremble as Paul reasoned to 
him of righteousness, temperance, and a judgment to come. 
But the greatness of conscience as a judge will be mani- 
fest in its highest power when there comes a revolution in 
the circumstances of our existence. It is especially when 
there passes over our being that mighty change that trans 
fers us from this world to another; then conscience will, in 
its new state of being, possess in its judicial decisions a far 
greater energy of action. Think for a moment of the ten 
thousand circumstances of this world that combine to silence 
or pervert the decisions of conscience. As Delilah bound 
round the sleeping Samson new ropes, she dreamed not that 
when awake, the strong man, at the cry of the Philistines, 



152 THE EQUITY AND 

would break them as flax before the tire. So also we reason 
of our conscience, that sleeping Samson in this world. 
But when the great trump of the last day is heard, — when 
resounding through the heavens there enters the cold grave 
the voice of God, "Awake ye dead, and come to judgment!" 
conscience then no longer will be bound with the ropes of 
Delilah. Coming forth from the closed chambers where fee- 
bly her voice was heard amid the confused clamor of human 
passion in this life, conscience then will assume the preroga- 
tives of a judge that will not be silenced in the discharge of 
duty. The verdict of Christ our judge will meet with a re- 
sponse in every heart. To the conscience itself will the 
appeal of equity be made, and true to its high source, true 
to its nature, true to the noblest privilege of its being, will 
conscience utter forth a decision that shall be as irreversible 
as the soul in its nature is immortal. 

When we are asked why is virtue virtue, it may be very 
well to say because virtue is useful, because it accords with 
the titness of things, it is in harmony with all moral law, is 
spiritual beauty and divine order. But all these things are 
the fruits of virtue, the necessary attendants upon virtue, not 
the tree itself. It is only when we say virtue is virtue, be- 
cause it is right, that we may be said to reach that wall of ada- 
mant beyond which all inquiry must stop. When the inter- 
rogation is put, why is virtue useful, or why does it accord 
with the fitness of things, or harmonize with divine law and 
order, or promote our noblest happiness ? — what other so- 
lution to this question can be given than that virtue is some- 
thing in itself intrinsically right, and is thus right, because 
conscience, our moral nature, ever commands us when seen 
to love it; because the feeling of obligation, universal as man, at 
once springs up in the heart; because conscience, long before 
the intellect can weigh the fruits of virtue, or calculate its 
consequences, instinctively tells us to love it and hate its 
opposite; because imperatively as the voice of God con- 
science demands that we should esteem, cherish, and fol- 
low virtue, be the consequences what they may; because 
conscience accuses us of wrong, where virtue is hated, and 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 153 

selfishness loved, be the advantages believed in ever so 
great ? 

But are we conscious how directly we attain unto the evi- 
dence of the equit}' and benevolence of God, when, in our ex- 
amination of conscience, we find that it accords as a divine rule 
of action implanted in man with the essential element of all 
virtue ? Do we suitably apprehend how much is included in 
the simple fact that conscience tells us to do what is right,, 
approves of it when seen, and uniformly, when used as God 
meant it should be used, condemns us for wrong-doing? Is 
it not evident that such a faculty shows the essential virtue 
of God and tells us that the great author of the conscience 
loves that which is right, and hates that which is wrong ; 
that he does so from his very nature before he made man, 
before he revealed his law, and from eternity when man or 
angel had no existence ? Can any absurdity be so great as 
that wdiich supposes that God's moral law should not be the 
transcript of his own equity and benevolence ? Is it possible 
that the universal law of God, based upon the immutable dis- 
tinction of right and wrong, should belie his own nature? It 
is one thing to consider conscience in its willful perversion, 
or in that abuse created by a depraved will and heart, but 
quite a different matter to view it simply as an original faculty 
in its legitimate exercise. 

We believe that conscience in the fall of man, and in the 
subsequent development of depravity in the human race, 
suffered with the rest of our nature; but conscience, even in 
its greatest ruin, shows as conclusively its origin from God 
as the intellect or the body. And the reason why especially 
the conscience is deserving of careful study, is that while the 
natural attributes of God are shown in the creation of this 
'.vorld and its inhabitants, there is a peculiar light thrown 
upon the moral attributes of God in everything relating to 
the moral nature of man. We distinguish between the moral 
image of God as reflected from an unperverted conscience, 
and conscience abused; but we must not shut our eyes to the 
great fact that God's equity, benevolence, and wisdom are seen 
even in the conscience, however debased. By a wrong con- 



154 THE EQUITY AND 

dition of circumstances the needle of the compass may point 
wrong; but who is disposed to question the wisdom and be- 
nevolence of the compass in itself considered ? Just so of 
the conscience ; we must view it as given to man for the no- 
blest and most benevolent end. 

Looking at it simplj' as an original faculty, we are irre- 
sistibly driven to the inference that as the appropriate office 
of conscience is to approve of right and condemn for wrong, 
as duty is its exclusive sphere, and the very end for which it 
was given, so also duty, eternal right, constitutes the essen- 
tial glory of the nature of God. ]N'o supposition can be more 
foolish and wicked than that God's work, as it comes from 
his hands, will throw falsehood upon his own nature, and re- 
pudiate in its right action the very author of its being. 

When we consider the happiness that arises from the exer- 
cise of the bodily organs, the useful end secured by tlie 
muscles of the human frame, the benevolence evinced in the 
animal creation, and the adaptation of nature to the varied 
offices of all creatures, we are indeed impressed with the 
goodness of God. But it is especially when man is viewed 
as having a conscience which is the great instrument by which 
all moral obligation is seen and felt, whose sphere of action 
is internal and limited to the merit and demerit of moral 
character, that we must arrive to the conclusion that such an 
instrument must come from a being who supremely loves the 
right and hates the wrong, and is himself essentially and eter- 
nally good. 

" Duty," says Francis Bowen, "is not caused, for it never 
began to be ; it has existed from eternity. We cannot even 
conceive of a period when justice was not, or will not be 
obligatory upon every being capable of understanding what 
justice requires: upon the idea or feeling expressed by the 
word ought, the whole science of morals depends. It diifers 
not in degree, but in kind, from desire and appetite, so that 
these can never really come into competition with it. In 
truth it does not admit of degrees, for there are no half-way 
obligations. Conscience either speaks absolutely, or not 
at all." 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 155 

Having thus considered the great element of virtue as con- 
sisting in the idea of right or duty, and that this alone is the 
exclusive sphere of conscience as the noblest faculty of man, 
is it not evident that conscience in its nature reveals the es- 
sential justice and benevolence of God? Does it not as a 
rule of conduct manifest the actual disposition of the Deity 
himself? Must we not infer that the great idea of right, of 
moral obligation, or the feeling comprehended in the word 
ought., had its origin from God ? Is it not evident, from the 
consideration of the moral constitution of. man, that God 
loves that which is in its nature good and hates that which 
is evil ; that he always approves of the right, and condemns 
for the wrong? God thus acts, not so much because he has 
made a law, as because his own infinite nature leads him to 
love the right and hate the wrong. 

It is a great step that we take to prove the equity and be- 
nevolence of God, when we show that there is something in 
virtue intrinsically good, and in its opposite inherently evil, 
and that conscience, as an original faculty, enjoins in its 
proper use the same love of virtue or right that reigns in the 
heart of God. Thus far the consideration of virtue as it 
comes before the intellect has been overlooked, and the atten- 
tion confined to the relation that virtue sustains to the con- 
science; but we must not confound the conscience with the 
intellect or the afltections. It is essentially difierent from both, 
however intimately the conscience may be associated with 
the intellect and afiections; it is evidently designed by God 
to be an absolute rule, and exercise a supreme control over 
the whole moral nature. It calls upon the will to obey its 
voice, upon the intellect to give to it information, and upon 
the afifections to love its beauty and urge to moral action. It 
imperatively enjoins submission upon all the faculties of our 
nature. 

But the conscience is vastly strengthened in its exercise by 
a written law: whatever may be its action in an unperverted 
state, it is essentially dependent, in the present fallen condi- 
tion of man, for its best exercise, upon the revealed will of 
God. In considering the chief element of all virtue, it has 



156 THE EQUITY AND 

been seen that it must omprebend that which is addressed 
to the highest part of our nature. If, by a careful analysis, 
we distinguish between virtue as presented to the intellect 
and affections, and virtue as presented to the conscience, w^e 
shall find that the intellect tells us what is true, the affections 
what is morally tit or beautiful, while the conscience gives 
the feeling of ought, and the idea of right. Can we then dis- 
criminate between the common quality of virtue and its first 
element, when we reach that wall of adamant that bounds 
all further inquiry? Certainly we can, by simply consider- 
ing virtue as it presents itself to the intellect and affections, 
and as it presents itself to the conscience. 

The intellect, as a perceiving power, tells us that virtue 
upon the whole is useful, that it promotes the highest happi- 
ness, conforms to order, and harmonizes with all moral law. 
The affections assure us that virtue is something in itself 
beautiful, good, lovely, and most desirable ; but the conscience 
imperatively tells us that virtue is right in its very essence, and 
awakens the feelins: of moral obli2:ation. Our moral con- 
stitution, with the threefold power of the intellect, affections, 
and conscience, calls for the exercise of virtue. There is 
then a twofold quality in all benevolence or goodness com- 
mon to all virtue: first — justice, and then love. The justice 
in benevolence or goodness regulates it, the love inspires it. 
God's justice makes his conduct always right, his love 
always urges him to right conduct. By justice the divine 
benevolence is forever upon the side of equity, of moral or- 
der and law, and by love always upon the side of that most 
useful, most happy and good. The one reigns supreme in 
the mind, the other in the heart of God. 

With great appropriateness McCosh remarks, " All deep 
and earnest inquirers into the nature of virtue have got at 
least a partial view of the complex truth, each has seen it 
under one aspect, and has gone away so ravished with the 
sight that he never thought of going round the object and in- 
quiring if it had another aspect equally lovely. Hutcheson 
is right in saying that in all virtue there is benevolence, and 
Edwards has given his theory a wider expansion in affirming 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 157 

that love to being is of the veiy essence of virtuous action. 
Clarke too' enunciated a profound truth when he said that 
there is an eternal fitness in virtue, for there is such a fitness 
in that righteousness which regulates benevolence. Reid 
and Stewart and Cousin have developed the mental process 
bv which this eternal fitness is discovered, and have shown, 
too, that virtue must reside in the will. Each has seen so 
much of the truth, to use an image of Jouftroj, each has 
seen one side of the pyramid, and has written beneath it, not 
as he ought, this is one side of the pyramid, but this is the 
pyramid. One party has seen the love, and another has seen 
the righteousness. Hutcheson observed that afifection and 
feelmg were essential parts of all virtue, but took no cogni- 
zance of the fixed principles by which they must be regu- 
lated. Edwards, in a profound investigation, discovered that 
love must be according to a rule, but did not follow out his 
investigations so far as to discover the fundamental nature 
of that rule, as being no less essential a part of that moral- 
ity than love itself. Clarke and Cudworth, with clear intel- 
lectual intuition, saw the presence of eternal and unresolv- 
abl*e principles. Reid and his followers have patiently 
investigated the powers of the human mind b}- which these 
principles are discovered; but none of these latter philoso- 
phers seem to give its proper place to the no less important 
element of benevolence. The true theory is to be found, not 
in the indiscriminate, not in the mere mechanical combina- 
tion of the two, but in their chemical combination, in the 
melting and fusing them into one." 

Thus it will be seen how the ablest writers upon the na- 
ture of virtue have difiTerently presented the subject. But 
virtue certainly has an aspect of peculiar value when contem- 
plated in its relation to the conscience. It is not affirmed 
that the whole of virtue, in the widest import of the word, 
is included in the idea of right. "We would not; to use the 
significant image of JoufFroy, make out the pyramid of vir- 
tue all over to be only that which is presented in its relation 
to the conscience. But there must be something upon which 
the great fabric of virtue should stand: and what is that 



158 THE EQUITY AND 

foundation unless it be the immutable principle of right? 
Where its eternal basis unless it be in righteousness ? Where 
that wall of adamant, unless it be in the feeling of oiight^ the 
sentiment of right, the first idea that lies at the root of all 
moral obligation ? If the conscience is higher in its office 
than the intellect or the affections, why should we not go to 
the noblest part of our nature for our most worthy idea of 
virtue? Why, in viewing the separate beauties of the pyra- 
mid of virtue, should we overlook the everlasting foundation 
of rock upon w^hich it stands ? 

In considering the moral constitution of man we must not 
overlook two elements that are essential to the existence of 
that constitution, and universally admitted by it : those two 
elements are personality q.\\(\. freedom. It is personality that 
distinguishes man from a thing ; it is freedom that gives re- 
sponsibility. Remove personality, and man is no more a 
moral agent than a stone; remove freedom, and man can 
no more be praised or blamed for his conduct than the wheel 
of a cotton-mill, or the boiler of a steamboat. 

But where, as the great source of evidence, do we look for 
personality and freedom? Is it not to the consciousness? 
does this not give the absolute certainty of man a person, 
and man free ? "Who can doubt the fact that he thinks, or 
feels ; and yet do thought and feeling and a sense of moral 
obligation find their foundation in the perfect certainty that 
the agent thus thinking, feeling, and having a sense of right 
and wrong, is a person and free ? Can any process of reason 
ever destroy this consciousness universal in man? Many a 
philosopher has attempted to destroy it, and have thought 
to merge finite personality into the personality of God, and 
finite freedom into a law, or mode of divine existence, and 
thus have landed into pantheism ; but pantheism, in doing 
away with human personality and freedom, must in consist- 
ency do away with all right or wrong in man, and with this all 
true accountability either to God or to man. But it is the 
peculiarity of consciousness that no perversion of mind can do 
away with its first principles. Some may reason themselves 
into the idea that there is no such thing as pleasure or pain, 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 159 

just as Berkeley imagined there was no external world; but 
consciousness will not belie itself: experience is a school- 
ruaster too stubborn to be fooled with senseless argument. 

There is another class of philosophers who are found in 
the opposite extreme; they ignore altogether the existence 
of God. There is nothing with them but man ; man is God 
and God is man. Divine personality is but another name for 
human personality, and the freedom of the Creator is all 
merged into the liberty of the creature. But here man's 
consciousness shows the atheist, even as the pantheist, in 
error. Man's consciousness is intimately associated with the 
idea of dependence, and this feeling of dependence shows 
itself in human history in a thousand ways. It is the basis of 
all systems of sacrifices to propitiate the favor of a higher 
power, and it speaks out in all the prayers, all the worship, 
and all the religion of man. Why so? Simply because hu- 
man consciousness tells of human guilt, and groans in pain 
with the burden of sin. But what is sin ? What is guilt? 
Do stones pra^' ? Is there sorrow in trees ? Is the warbling of 
the bird, or the roar of the lion, a confession of guilt ? Do 
we get our idea of churches or temples of worship,' Prot- 
estant or Catholic, Mohammedan or Pagan, from the beasts 
of the field ? ]^o indeed ! 

What does this show ? Does it not declare the great fact 
of moral dependence with moral responsibility, — freedom 
with personality? Is not human consciousness as hostile to 
the atheist as to the pantheist? Is not the history of atheism 
and pantheism that of extremes meeting, and both belying 
each other ? Both start from one common point, even that 
of denying the facts of consciousness : but the facts of con- 
sciousness are the first principles, the axioms of all reason- 
ing, and both atheist and pantheist show their senseless folly 
by repudiating that upon which all reasoning is based. But 
would not the mathematician show himself an idiot who 
should formally announce that he should demonstrate the 
high problems of geometry without admitting as first steps 
the axioms of geometry ? But consciousness has its axioms 
as much as mathematics. First truths do not admit of any 



160 THE EQUITY AND 

process of reason ; they would not be first principles or truths 
if thej were reasoned out ; they are the foundation of reason, 
and reason cannot go higher than its source. The stream 
does not make the fountain, but the fountain the stream. 
The axiom that the whole is greater than its part cannot 
admit a process of demonstration. ^"0 reason can make an 
intuitive certainty any plainer The facts of consciousness 
are as certain and miiversal as the axioms of mathematics, 
but they are equally beyond the process of reason : reason, 
like the senses, has its bounds ; within its sphere it can lead 
to certain truth, but no sooner does it get out of its sphere 
than it shows its folly, first by confusing plain truth, and then 
by making confusion worse confounded. This is peculiarly 
so when reason attempts to do away with the facts of con- 
sciousness. It is the insane attempt of the head, and hands, 
and feet, in the fable, to do away Avith the body ; but the 
body destroyed, and the head, hands, and feet must perish 
too. All that reason gets by denying the facts of conscious- 
ness is self-destruction. If the foundation* of all reason is 
taken away, reason itself must fall to the ground. The facts 
of consciousness, like the rock-bound coast of England, have 
for ages withstood the impetuous waves of pantheism, athe- 
ism, and materialism, and for ages have these angry billows 
been beaten back, and yet while human depravity lasts will 
they be denied or explained away; but no infidelity can con- 
ceal these facts: they will project out like this rocky coast, 
against which in vain dash the waves of the sea. 

"Merely literary men," gays Wilson, taking the thought 
from Verplanck, "are slow to admit that vulgar minds can 
have any rational perception of truths involving great and 
high contemplation. They overlook the distinction between 
the nice analysis of principles, the accurate statement of 
definitions, logical inferences, and the solution of diflftculties, 
and the structure of our oion thoughts, and the plat/ of the affec- 
tions. They discern not between the theory of metaphysical 
science and the first truths and rational instincts which are 
implanted in the hearts of all, and which prepare them to see 
the glory of the Gospel, to feel its influence, and to argue 
from both for both the divinity of Christianity." 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 161 

The instinctive feelings of our nature, and those intuitive 
truths upon which the whole science of reasoning is built, 
are often very little considered. It has been the great mis- 
take of most arguments upon the existence and attributes of 
God, that tJie subtlety of metaphysics has been resorted to, 
rather than those self-evident truths recognized by man in 
all ages. The evidence for* a God of infinite goodness and 
justice is addressed to us through two mediums, — that of the 
senses and the consciousness. Important as may be the 
former, and necessary to satisfy the reason, yet the latter, in 
the universality of its power and influence, far surpasses it. 
There is none the less reality in the truth of the evidence of 
consciousness because it cannot be clothed in the precise 
language of logic. The feeling that I exist, or that my idea 
of an external world has an objective reality, are truths as 
certain as any axiom in mathematics, '^o demonstration to 
a man can be higher than self-demonstration. Our nature is 
so constructed that we instinctively believe that every effect 
must have a cause, — that if man cannot create himself, or the 
world create itself, or the laws of nature adjust themselves, 
then we must look for a cause above and without these 
things, by the double evidence of the senses and the con- 
sciousness. We are forced to believe in an infinite cause, 
self-existing, underived and eternal, — the author of man, of 
nature, and its laws. 

"When we study the conscience we find it to be a great law 
of dut3^ Within the heart do we carry about a witness 
for the goodness of God that no sophistry can obliterate. 
We must believe in accordance with the first principles of 
belief; we must think as we are constituted; our nature is 
outraged if we do not thus think. We are upon a sea of end- 
less uncertainty if we refuse thus to believe. We are forced 
to admit, that even if conscience, an external world, ourselves 
were chimeras, if by any possibility they could be mere 
fictions of imagination ; yet we must act and think and have 
as deep a conviction of the reality of things as if things were 
real ; and however far we might venture upon the sea of skep- 
ticism, yet we would be compelled by our inherent convic- 

11 



162 THE EQUITY AND 

tions of reality to retarn back, for first principles cannot be 
tortured into error as the deductions of reason. The skeptic 
can' gain nothing by disavowing the intuitive convictions of 
his nature ; he does not better himself by his eflbrts of self- 
annihilation. 

" There is a spiritual sun," says Fenelon, '' that enlightens 
the soul more fully than the material sun does the body. 
This sun of truth leaves no shadow, and it shines upon both 
hemispheres. It is as brilliant in the night as in the day- 
time ; it is not without that it sheds its rays, it dwells within 
each one of us, — one man cannot hide its rays from another ; 
whatever corner of the earth we may go to there it is. We 
never need say to another. Stand back that I may see it; you 
hide its rays from me, you deprive me of that which is my 
due. This glorious sun never sets; no clouds intercept its 
rays but those formed by our passions. It is one bright day. 
It sheds light upon the savage in the darkest caverns. There 
are no eyes so weak that they cannot bear its light ; and 
there is no man so blind and miserable that does not walk 
by the feeble light from this source that he still retains in 
his conscience." 

But this spiritual sun that Fenelon calls the conscience, 
carries with it the highest evidence of the goodness of God. 
By teaching us that duty is our highest end, — the acting 
right the noblest exercise of man, — it reveals as truly the will 
of God to us as if that will was written upon the sky. Why, 
if God was not good, would he implant a principle in our 
nature that would lead us to despise wrong and injustice 
whenever felt and seen ? Why thus instiuctive the feelings 
that rise up in the heart of approbation of right, of approval 
of virtue, of esteem for the lovely and excellent, unless the 
author of our nature himself loved the right and the good ! 
Let it be observed, skepticism cannot so confound the essen- 
tial nature of things as to lead us to deny that there is reality 
to the internal ideas of right and wrong. It cannot say 
virtue and vice are only the deceptive creations of the im- 
agination, as all the reasoning in the world will not convince 
a man that there is no ocean that he gazes upon, no ground 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 163 

upon which he walks, no sound that be hears, no flower that 
he smells ; so no sophistry can blind the mind to tbe inherent 
reality of rigbt and wrong, virtue and vice. Our knowledge 
of these distinctions is none the less certain because it is in- 
tuitive or self-evident. First truths are always intuitions: 
no explanation can make clearer to us the idea that the 
whole is greater than a part, or that two is more than one ; 
no reasonino^ can make clearer to us the idea of our self- 
existence, or more convincing the feeling that we ought to 
do what is right, and avoid what is wrong. Who but a 
Being who loves tbe good and hates the bad would so con- 
stitute the heart? Would God give in the soul of man a 
spiritual sun to reveal the deformity of sin and the beauty of 
virtue, if that sun only unveiled that which would awaken 
contempt of the Deity himself? What an absurdity, what 
wickedness in the idea that the author of our moral constitu- 
tion would not have it in its proper exercise the reflection of 
his own justice and goodness ! 

'' The great Creator," says Dr. Alexander, " has not left 
himself without a witness in the heart of every man. It is 
possible that a man may be so abandoned as to believe in 
lies, and that he may come to disbelieve the God that made 
and supports him. Bat he cannot obliterate the law written 
in his heart ; he cannot divest himself of the conviction that 
certain actions are morally wrong ; nor can he prevent the 
stings of remorse when he commits sins of an enormous 
kind. Men may indeed spin out refined metaphysical theo- 
ries, and come to the conclusion that there is no difference 
between virtue and vice, and that these distinctions are the 
result of education. But let some one commit a flagrant act 
of injustice towards themselves, and their practical judgment 
will soon give the lie to their theoretical opinions. As those 
speculatists, who argue that there is no external world, will 
avoid running against a post, or into the fire, as carefully 
as other men, so they who endeavor to reason themselves 
into the belief that virtue and vice are mere notions gener- 
ated by education, cannot nevertheless avoid perceiving that 
some actions are base, unjust, or ungrateful, and consequently 



164 THE EQUITY AND 

to be disapproved of, whether committed by themselves or 
others." 

Thus it will be seen that conscience is that spiritual sun 
within us whose voice proclaims an ever-present God. This 
arises not so much from the deductions of reason as from 
the instructive feeling of our nature; assuring us that the 
great law within, universal as man, must have an author, and 
that the Being who made us must, with the conscience, love 
the good and hate the bad. Other evidences of the goodness 
of God fall immeasurably short of this in conclusiveness and 
power. This is the evidence ever}^ man carries about with 
him in his own bosom, — immediate in its decision and instruc- 
tive in its agency. Thus, we find the existence of conscience 
has far more to do with the idea of God and his righteous- 
ness than is often imas^ined. Man feels more than he reas- 
ons. The former is spontaneous, while the latter creeps 
with slow pace over the ground. With undisciplined minds 
this is peculiarly true. Thus, we see the fact of God's exist- 
ence ; and his goodness, even when first announced, finds a 
response of acquiescence so universal in the conscience. 
Thus, we see the multitude of all ages, corrupt as they may 
be, and ignorant as they may be, yet never in theory disput- 
ing the evidence of a Supreme Being, and his goodness. 
Confused as may be their idea of God, erroneous as may be 
the conceptions of his moral character, misguided as maybe 
the homage paid to false idols, yet conscience, however per- 
verted, cannot easily be made to give up the idea of one 
infinite Being of justice and goodness. When false philoso- 
phy and the superstition of centuries have thrown their black 
foliage over the foundation of the greatest of truths, and 
enveloped thick in their embrace of death the noblest part 
of man, yet conscience, the icall of adamcmi, is still seen by the 
observer through the chinks and openings of that fatal 
drapery that surrounds it. 

Most convincingly has Pascal said, " We know the truth 
not only by the reason but also by the heart; it is by the 
heart that we know first principles, and it is in vain that reas- 
oning, which has no part in it, tries to combat them. The 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 165 

PyrrhoDists, whose only object this is, strive for it in vain. 
We know that we do not dream, however impotent we may 
be to prove it by reason ; this impotence proves nothing 
more than the feebleness of our reason, but not the uncer- 
tainty of all our knowledge as they pretend. For the knowl- 
edge of first principles, as of s;pace, time, movement, numbers, 
is as certain as any of those that our reasonings give us. 
And it is on this knowledge of the heart and instinct that 
reason must support herself, and on this she founds her whole 
procedure. The heart feels that there are three dimensions in 
space, and that numbers are infinite ; and the reason demon- 
strates its course, that there are no two square numbers of 
which one is double the other. Principles are felt, proposi- 
tions are proved ; and all with certainty, although in differ- 
ent ways; and it is as ridiculous for the reason to demand of 
the heart proofs of its first principles, in order to be willing 
to consent to them, as it would be for the heart to demand 
of the reason a feeling of all the propositions that it demon- 
strates in order to be willing to receive them." 

The great author of the moral constitution of man has so 
made it that it shall plainly testify to two things : First, 
that he himself, as the absolute, the infinite, the eternal, loves 
supremely duty ; secondly, that he loves supremely truth. 
If we keep in mind the ever needful distinction between 
God's work and man's perversion, we shall find that truth is 
the natural end for which the mind is made, even as duty is 
that for which the moral sensibilities are given. The melan- 
choly history of man shows that God's purpose in his crea- 
tion is frustrated by his natural love of error, even as by his 
inclination to fly from the restraints of duty. But, because 
we see the painful evidence that man is wrong in his head 
and his heart, it does not imply that man is made for error 
and guilt. It does not imply that God loves either. The 
whole moral constitution of man speaks out against this in- 
ference. What is the actual fact in relation to the intellect 
and the heart ? We certainly can tell the use of an axe, 
and for what it is intended, even if by abuse the edge of it 
may be as blunt as a fence rail. Xow the intellect was made 



166 THE EQUITY AND 

for truth. First, because through the senses in their appro- 
priate sphere the facts of the outward world exactly corre- 
spond to the internal impressions of the mind. The mind, 
using the senses as instruments, is not deceived in relation to 
external things. The idea mentally of a tree, a brook, a hill, 
a house, corresponds with the things themselves. This is 
always the case with the senses legitimately used. And 
secondly, the professed object of the intellect in all investi- 
gations is truth. Error as error is not professed to be the 
end of human reason: error is often imbibed instead of the 
truth; but the very fact that men are so ashamed to confess 
that they are seeking error rather than truth, speaks 
volumes in favor of God's making the mind for truth, 
and to be satisfied only with it. What are all the fair pre- 
tenses of error and its crooked by-paths but the unwilling 
concession of the mind to the worth of truth ! Truth does 
not hide its face as error does. Truth stands upon its own 
merits, while error is ever aiming to clothe its loathsome 
body with the garb of truth. It will steal its semblance if it 
cannot glory in its reality. Truth is constantly counterfeited, 
because error seen in its naked hideousness revolts the mind. 
But why should the mind revolt at error undisguised if it 
was made for it ? If truth is a matter of indifference with 
God, why does he speak out so loudly in its favor in man's 
moral constitution ? If the false currency of error is all the 
same with the Deity as the genuine gold of truth, why has he 
made the human mind so ashamed of error when exposed, 
and so confident and joyful even when truth is established ? 
The moral constitution is made not only for the actual reali- 
ties of life, but the love of error and habitual self-deception 
Avill put it all out of tune, and, like a sweet instrument of 
music with the strings out of place, the very discords given 
will show the perversion of that purpose for which it was in- 
tended. All the professions of men boasting that they are 
in search of the truth, reveal the great fact that error is not 
a normal condition of the mind, but an abnormal condition. 
God designed the mind to find out truth, and not to be 
cheated every hour with delusions. As a melancholy fact, 



BEXEVOLEXCE OF GOD. 167 

men do constantly and perseveringlv practice self-deception. 
Reason is ever getting out of its sphere, and pretending to 
decide things, where there is a perfect incompetence of 
knowled2:e. Back of the reason there is the will and affec- 
tions ; and if error is followed after more than truth, does not 
Eevelation give the solution to the difficulty in the words : 
"And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the 
world ; and men loved darkness rather than light because 
their deeds were evil." 

Equally evident is it that God made the heart for duty. 
All our moral sensibilities speak out the momentous truth 
that their great Author is good and loves good in his crea- 
tures, that truth and duty should be the aim of every moral 
agent. Xothing more strikingly illustrates God's end in 
man's creation than the universal principle upon which all 
civil law, all criminal law, and all courts of justice are based. 
Two words sum up the professed end of all human govern- 
ment, t)nith and dut>/. However philosophers may reason, 
mankind can assume no other end in human law ; human 
law may be oppressive, but it does not label oppression upon 
its face ; civil enactments may be unjust, but they never pro- 
fess to seek injustice rather than justice; human decisions 
may be erroneous, but they never acknowledge that error 
rather than truth is aimed at. It is not thus that error and 
injustice walk the earth; their danger lies in their conceal- 
ment, not their exposure. Here, then, is the stubborn fact 
that always arrays itself against the atheist, the pantheist, 
and the materialist. Mankind do act upon the principle, 
whatever may be its misapplication, of treating vice as vice, 
virtue as virtue, truth as truth, and error as error. Law does 
profess and seek to carry out the great end of punishing vice, 
protecting virtue, exposing error, and vindicating truth. 
Law professing a different end would not be tolerated ; 
humanity, corrupt as it is, rises up in wrath against legalized 
injustice when exposed and judicial error unmasked. Ob- 
serve how crime when punished is approved of; how inno- 
cence tortured is condemned. Observe how the universal 
voice of humanity calls for law, simply because the end pro- 



168 THE EQUITY AND 

fessed of law is truth and duty, ^ow this end, universally 
professed by human law, shows clearly that the common 
judgment of mankind in relation to truth and error, virtue 
and vice, has its foundation in the consciousness or heart; it 
is all based upon those first principles which no ingenuity or 
reasoning can ignore. • Indeed, those very philosophers who 
loudly declaim against human personality and freedom and 
responsibility; who confound moral agency with the fatalism 
of mere law, and convert the great element of personality 
into a thing ; those who disregard the essential distinction 
between mind and matter, or who so deify cause and effect 
as to exclude the First Great Cause, all are compelled to go 
upon the common principle of human law, that never ques- 
tions the fact of the fundamental distinction between virtue 
and vice, truth and error. Those philosophers who build in 
their minds such fine castles of speculation, have as a plain 
fact to confess their folly and repudiate their conclusions 
whenever they are brought into collision with the actual 
verities of life. Whatever may be the theories of philoso- 
phers who seek to transcend the natural limits of reason and 
deny the facts of consciousness, their practice in the every- 
day concerns of life shows that they believe quite as firmly, 
when their own interests are at stake, in personality, freedom, 
truth, error, virtue, vice, and moral responsibility, as the 
great multitude who never have had the presumption to 
deny these things. All punishment and reward have their 
reason in the first truths of consciousness. The very oaths 
taken in a court of law involve the idea of divine authority 
and human dependence and responsibility to it, confirmed by 
that universal consciousness that teaches man that he is a 
person, and an accountable person. Now the certainty that the 
earth turns round upon its axis, or makes an annual revolu- 
tion around the sun, is not more firmly established than the 
facts of consciousness. It is a great truth, that deny them 
as we may, we all of us have to act upon them ; all law is 
built upon them ; all correct reason must use them as axioms. 
When a certain slave, punished for theft, exclaimed to his 
master, ''I am fated (that is, necessitated) to steal," that mas- 



BENEVOLENCE OF GOD. 169 

ter was glad to repudiate in practice his fine-spun philosophy 
by replying to him, " And you are 2i\^o fated to he whipped.'' 

Looking, then, to the universally admitted facts of con- 
sciousness, and considering the intuitive conviction of the 
certainty of these facts, can we come to any other conclusion 
than this, — that God, who made the human consciousness 
and heart even as the intellect and faculty of reasoning, in- 
tended that man's moral constitution should recognize the 
personality and benevolence of God himself? Judging of 
the maker by his workmanship, do we not find in the all-per- 
vading conviction of human personality, of freedom, of moral 
responsibility, of cause and eft'ect, of the necessity and excel- 
lence of virtue and truth, of the folly and injury- of error and 
vice, and the professed end of all law to arrive at truth and 
establish justice, the certain evidence that if such is God's 
work, such the established order of the world without us and 
within us, then, notwithstanding the perversity of the mind 
of man, his sinfulness and his guilt, notwithstanding the prev- 
alence of error and crime, the character of God is vindicated, 
and his being shown forth in his personality and freedom as 
infinit-^^j wise, benevolent, and just? 



CHAPTER XX. 

" THE PROBLEM OF PHYSICAL AND MORAL EVIL." 

It will be our object to show that there have been ideas 
attached to the import of the words omnipotence and infinite 
benevolence altogether erroneous, and speculations upon what 
the Deity might do or ought to do, in every respect unbe- 
coming the limited range of the human mind. 

" We have explained enough," says Leibnitz, " when we 
have shown that there are cases where some disorder in apart 
is necessary to the production of the greatest order in the 
whole. But M. Boyle, it appears, demands a little too much. 
He wishes that we should show him in detail how evil is linked 
with the best possible plan of a universe. This would be a 
perfect explanation of the phenomena. But we undertake 
not to give it, and what is more, we are not obliged to give 
it, a thing impossible in the present state. It is enough for 
us to make the observation, that nothing hinders, but that a 
certain particular evil may be linked with that which, viewed 
in its totality, is the best. This imperfect explanation, and 
which leaves something to be discovered in another life, is 
sufficient for a solution of objections, but not for a compre- 
hension of the thing." 

This opinion of Leibnitz is deserving of careful considera- 
tion. His hypothesis in respect to the introduction of evil 
presents a serious obstacle in the way of those who would 
imagine that its existence implied a deficiency in the benevo- 
lence of God. Whether correct or incorrect, it answers a 
most useful purpose in throwing the burden of proof against 
the divine benevolence upon the hands of skeptics. The 
skeptic at least cannot say the present system may not on 
the whole be the best possible to God; that his present 
(HO) 



THE PROBLEM OF PHYSICAL AND MORAL EVIL. 171 

universe, in its totality, with the disorder of sin, may not be 
better than any other possible universe to God. Reasoning 
alone upon the ground that the greatest amount of happiness 
is the greatest good, the skeptic, upon that assumption, cannot 
say that for aught he knows there may not in its totality 
be a greater amount of happiness in the present universe 
with the incidental permission of evil, than would be in 
another universe with no sin in it. If the greatest good is to 
be measured by the greatest happiness in the aggregate, how 
does the skeptic know but that the present universe embodies 
more happiness than any other possible universe ? How does 
he know but that a more permanent and larger increase of 
good may result from the present order of things than from 
any other ? Is the skeptic capable of prescribing to God what 
should be his best kind of universe? Does he know that 
anything better, upon the whole, can be done than has been 
done? Admitting that among all those possible universes 
present to the mind of the Deity there was the weighing in 
scales the aggregate happiness of each separate universe, can 
the skeptic say that among them all the present universe, 
called into existence by God, was not the best? Can his own 
limited mind pronounce that God might do better than he 
has done ? Can he say that there is a defect in divine power 
or goodness ? 

But the difficulty of the skeptic is greatly augmented when 
he carefully ponders the real value of free moral agency. 
One thing is certain : if sin is not possible, neither is virtue ; 
if wrong cannot be committed, neither can right; if there is 
no power to do evil, neither is their power to do good ; if 
freedom of choice cannot exist in wickedness, neither can it 
in holiness. The powder of choice implies something to 
choose between, viz.: the existence of two things, and one 
different from the other. 

Free moral agency presupposes in its nature the possi- 
bility of sin : for freedom in a creature to exist, there must 
be the liberty of choice between the good and the evil. 
The question is not then, whether a free moral agent cannot 
sin, but whether he may not sin, and yet God do all things 



172 THE PROBLEM OF PHYSICAL 

for the best. It is whether siu and misery ina}^ not exist, and 
yet the present universe be the best possible to God. ■ 

We think the hypothesis of Leibnitz, upon the supposition 
that the greatest good is the greatest amount of happiness, 
impossible to be refuted. As such, the burden of proof is all 
upon the side of the skeptic ; and, until he can show the con- 
trary, he has no business to point to the existence of evil as 
in any respect implying a defect in the goodness or in the 
benevolence of God. It is not for the skeptic to call upon 
the Christian believer to unravel the profound intricacies of 
the problem of moral evil. The Christian but poorly under- 
stands the real strength of his available ground when he 
thinks it necessary to explain everything before he can call 
upon his opponent to believe. Most happily has Leibnitz 
thrown into the face of his learned adversary the unanswera- 
ble words : ** But M. Boyle, it appears, demands a little too 
much. He thinks that w^e should show him in detail how 
evil is linked with the best possible plan of a universe. This 
would be a perfect explanation of the phenomena.''' 

Xot only is it self-evident that this would be a perfect 
explanation of the phenomena, but it is equally certain that 
such an explanation is impossible to a finite mind. We 
stand not at the commencement of the great chain of Divine 
Providence, but more truly in the middle of that chain. Be- 
hind us is a boundless eternity, before us lie ages everlasting. 
How then, in the nature of things, can we take into detail 
the universe of God ? How are we capable of sounding the 
deeps of God's providence ? When we measure with our 
short line and plummet, are we conscious how vast is that 
distance down which we think to go ? What arrogance then 
to call upon the believer in God's infinite goodness to explain 
in detail the permission of evil ? With the innumerable 
positive proofs of the Divine goodness before him, is the 
skeptic at liberty to question the fact of God's benevolence, 
because he may not be able to see into the mystery of the 
moral disorder that reigns in the world ? 

Says Lactantius, who professes to have taken his views 
from Epicurus; "The Deity is either willing to take away 



AND 310 RAL EVIL. 173 

all evil, but is not able to do so, in which case he is not om- 
nipotent, or he is able to remove the evil, but is not willing, 
in which case he is not benevolent ; or he is neither willing 
nor able, which is a denial of the perfections of God ; or he is 
both able and willing to do away with the evil, and yet it 
exists." 

This dilemma, that at first sight appears so plausible, van- 
ishes upon a nearer investigation. What does this dilemma 
involve ? Simply an assertion that cannot be proved, — even 
the competence of a finite mind to prescribe what omnipo- 
tence can do, and what infinite benevolence should do. But 
can any scale be constructed by which we may measure infi- 
nite power and benevolence ? Are we not aware that when 
we separately contemplate the two attributes of infinite power 
and goodness, we must look not to the outward development, 
but the principle itself of Divine power and goodness ? . If we 
supposed omnipotence exhausted itself in the works of crea- 
tion, if there was no other world or being that God could 
make, then would not such an idea limit the infinity of God's 
power? Suppose the full compliment of worlds and beings 
made up in the universe, if God could add nothing more, 
would his power be unlimited? If all possible exercise 
of power is restricted to the present universe, then some- 
thing more would be impossible. Suppose that universe 
had in it a thousand degrees of happiness, one more de- 
gree added would not be in the power of God. Equally 
vague is the idea of the word infinite as applied to Divine 
benevolence. 

In the very nature of things that which is infinite cannot 
be restricted to actual development, otherwise the infinite ivould 
be finite. The measure of the infinity of God is to be esti- 
mated from what he can do,,— from the boundless resources 
within his nature, — not the outward manifestation of that 
nature. There is a necessary limit to a finite being of power 
even as of goodness ; but the infinite being cannot exhaust 
his power or benevolence in outward development, or he 
would cease to be infinite and become finite. All works 
must have an end ; that w^hich has a beginning in number 



174 THE PROBLEM OF PHYSICAL 

must have a termination in number. There is a limit to the 
universe or there could be no commencement; as the uni- 
verse is the aggregate of parts, so one part taken away or 
something added that did not exist before, diminishes or 
increases the number that goes to make up the whole. Con- 
sequently, if the amount could not be increased, would not 
the universe be the measure of the divine power rather than 
the manifestation of it ? It should never be forgotten, that 
it is wholly beyond the finite mind to prescribe bounds either 
to the power or to the goodness of God. 

What constitutes the essential idea of the infinity of the 
attributes of God is the fact that the measure of it exists in 
the nature of God, not in the outward developments of God 
in the universe. The world we live in reveals the boundless 
power and goodness of God, but it does not prescribe that 
power or goc^dness, neither does the universe do it. God, 
as infinite, must have in himself resources transcendentally 
greater than any outward development of these resources. 

^' The greatest possible efi^brt of infinite power," says Presi- 
dent Appleton, "• is a solecism in language. Infinite power is 
a power without limits, but every effect is, and must be, finite. 
It is absurd to speak of an effect equal to infinite power; and 
it is impossible to imagine any effect so great that God can- 
not produce a greater; for if all the creatures now existing 
were elevated to the nature and dignity of angels, still, as 
thei-e is no ne j9^^ts ultra of Almighty power, they might be 
raised still higher. Besides, their number might be increased. 
But number implies limits; let it be doubled, trebled, or 
multiplied by a million, still the product has limits; and a 
limited effect bears no proportion to an unlimited cause. All 
the objections to the goodness of God on account of his not 
having produced happiness to'the utmost of his power, do 
therefore rest on absurdity. But suppose it were otherwise, 
and the greatest possible effort of infinite power did not 
imply a contradiction, it would still be perfectly beyond such 
limited capacities as ours to ascertain whether Deity had pro- 
ceeded to the utmost extent of such power in the production 
of happiness. Consequently, if the objection were well- 



AND MORAL EVIL. 175 

founded, it would be impossible for Deity himself to enable 
human creatures to ascertain his goodness." 

One object in this valuable quotation is to make clear the 
great truth, that no finite mind can prescribe bounds to the 
power or the goodness of God. The actual development can 
bear no comparison to the infinite cause. We have alluded 
to the theory of Leibnitz, upon the best possible S3'stem of the 
universe, not because we are partial to his optimism, which 
we believe is open to objection, but because we think his 
theory at least impossible to be refuted by that class of minds 
who are so fond of weighing in the scales the necessary quan- 
tity of the divine power and goodness ; who reason as if virtue 
and happiness were ponderable things, and as susceptible of 
measurement and weight as sugar and corn ; but the fact is, 
virtue and happiness are not capable of being weighed by 
any analogy with material things. They refer to qualities of 
moral agents, acts of responsible beings. Virtue and happi- 
ness are abstract ideas, that apply not to the aggregate, but to 
the individuals that make it up. It is not the universe that 
is to be looked at, but each responsible agent in it. We are to 
determine the quantity of virtue and happiness not by a 
general abstraction that hems in the whole universe, but by 
the merit of each individual in that universe. The divine 
equity is vindicated if full justice is done to the individual, 
no matter where in the scale of being he commenced, or 
where he ended. It is the separate sphere where each act 
that God looks at, not the whole with all compounded 
together. 

Let us examine what should be the chief end, and what is 
the highest interest of man, — what, in truth, is the greatest 
good. Is it happiness or virtue ? Is it right or pleasure ? Is 
it to be virtuous we should chiefly live for, or is it to be happy ? 
When we contrast the two together, is not virtue the highest 
of the two? The problem of the existence of physical and 
moral evil is relieved of its greatest difiiculty when virtue is 
considered a greater good than happiness. God's chief end 
in creation is not then to produce so much the greatest hap- 
piness, as the greatest virtue; not to propose, as the highest 



176 THE PROBLEM OF PHYSICAL 

end to a moral agent, pleasure as duty. Happiness indeed is 
connected with virtue, but it is the fruit, not the nature itself 
of virtue, — the servant but not the master. 

But if virtue is the highest interest of man, is not the lib- 
erty to do wrong essential to its very existence? Would 
there be any virtue if there was nothing to test it? If we 
took away freedom, where would be the development of 
right conduct ? If we removed harm and suifering, where 
would be the virtues of patience, of courage, of endurance, 
of compassion, and of mercy ? Suppose the present universe 
did not secure, in the aggregate, the greatest possible happi- 
ness, who can sa}" that it does not the greatest possible virtue? 
Suppose the ultimate stock of pleasure by the existence of 
physical and moral evil diminished, who can say the devel- 
opment of right may not be immeasurably increased ? Sup- 
pose our finite minds might weigh the ultimate amount of 
pleasure, and we should find it less than in some other pos- 
sible universe, would not a vastly nobler manifestation of 
right, a more brilliant development of virtue, more than 
compensate for the loss? 

But divine goodness is relieved of all objection if it can 
be shown that any suffering, any moral evil, is consistent 
with infinite benevolence. It is unnecessary for us to dis- 
cuss the full amount, the extent, of moral or physical evil ; 
all that we have to do is to show that any is consistent with 
the goodness of God. JnTo matter how large the amount of 
evil, yet if some can be shown to be consistent with divine 
benevolence, then the question at once is settled as to the 
consistency of the permission of physical and moral evil 
with infinite benevolence. For if some evil is necessary, or 
consistent with the goodness of God, why not the existence 
of all the present physical and moral evil ? Can any person 
be competent to prescribe to Omnipotence what he should 
do, where he should stop, or how much evil it is proper for 
him to permit in his universe ? If the greatest good is vir- 
tue and not the highest pleasure, right and not the greatest 
happiness; if duty is man's noblest interest, and not joy, — 



AND MORAL EVIL. 177 

then who can say that the present systen^is not on the whole 
the best for God to make? 

Let us then carefully examine whether any evil, physical 
or moral, is consistent with the benevolence of God. Let 
us commence with the lower order of creation. Pain and 
death to the brutes are evils; but would animal existence be 
possible, constituted as the world is, without death ? Is not 
the aggregate amount of happiness vastly increased by the 
number of the inferior animals who come into existence ? 
Would myriads of creatures enjoy existence unless death had 
granted to them a sphere of enjoyment by the removal of a 
surplus number? Estimating, where virtue and vice are 
impossible, the goodness of God by the greatest amount of 
happiness, can it be shown that as much enjoyment would 
exist in the animal kingdom without death as with it? Con- 
sider, also, that death renders certain an inconceivably 
greater number to enjoy life. Consider again, that if it is a 
gratuitous blessing to give life ; if the creature brought into 
being had, previous to existence, no claim upon God for the 
enjoyments granted in life, then certainly a creature has no 
claim upon God for endless existence. If no favor was due 
the creature before existence, certainly there can be no 
demand upon God for a deathless being. 

But the question at once is settled of the goodness of in- 
flicting death, when the momentary evil is contrasted with 
the vast amount of enjoyment afforded. Consider how great 
is that enjoyment even among the lowest orders of creation! 
If we could imagine them endowed with foresight, would 
they not prefer their joyous life to having no life, and with 
it no death ? If the cup of existence with its few pains was 
offered in one hand, and non-existence with no pain in the 
other, would it be difficult to determine which would be 
chosen? Contemplate the few pains that, happen to the 
brute creation. lN"ow pain can be shown in the present con- 
stitution of things to be a positive blessing. In the vast 
majority of cases, to every individual of the brute creation, 
it comes only at extremely long intervals of their existence. 
The whole life is passed in enjoyment, in most cases, with 

12 



178 THE PROBLEM OF PHYSICAL 

only the momentary uneasiness of death. Animals not hav- 
ing human reason do not anticipate with dread their death. 
^ov are the pains upon the whole much greater than what 
are absolutely needful for their preservation. Bodily pain is 
the sentinel that keeps watch over the system. Had animals 
no pain, no dread instinctive of suffering, it is inconceivable 
how they could exist, l^o efforts would be made to avert 
danger — no exertion to avoid destruction. The brute crea- 
tion have just enough of uneasiness to urge to active effort 
to avoid physical evil.. Animals are placed under just enough 
of restraint to secure them from perpetual ruin. 

jSTor is the degree of pain equal with all. The lower down 
w^e go in the animal scale the simpler the organization, the 
more limited the sphere of exercise or enjoyment, the more 
inferior the faculties, the less we have reason to believe is 
the sensation of pain. Thus, as a compensation for a rela- 
tive degradation in the scale 6f animal life, we see a diminution 
of all sensibility to suffering. The head of a dragon-fly will 
eat after it is severed from the body. One remarkable pecu- 
liarity in respect to paio, and which reveals the benevolence 
of God, is, that the nerves that give the sensation of pain are 
mostly upon the surface of the body, and the deeper the in- 
cision of the knife the less the pain. Thus, where it is most 
needed we find pain, and where it is less needed less pain. 
Upon the surface of the body there exists most danger, and 
there is needed upon the surface of the body greater warn- 
ing. The peculiarity of animal life is, that its existence 
every moment would be endangered were it not for the prin- 
ciple of fear engendered by pain. Can, then, the existence of 
physical evil to the lower orders of creation conflict in any 
degree with the benevolence of God ? Do we not find it 
even a strong evidence of divine goodness ? Could it be, 
under the present constitution of things, dispensed with 
without great detriment ? Here, then, is one step taken 
to show that some evil is clearly consistent with infinite 
benevolence ! 

Let us, then, ascend up to a higher order of creatures : let 
us take man. Here we come to a free moral agent; here we 



A^W MORAL EVIL. 179 

find conscience, a moral sense, the feeling of responsibility 
and obligation. If man is a free moral agent, then the pos- 
sibility of his falling into sin is directly involved in it. Then 
there must be liberty of choice, the ability of choosing between 
the good and the bad, the inherent power of being virtuous or 
vicious. The freedom involved in man's moral nature must 
enable him to obey or disobey. Can the objector to the 
divine goodness — because man is a sinner, and therefore liable 
to sufiering and punishment — say that it would be better 
that man's freedom should be taken away, that his liberty 
shonld cease to exist, than that he should be liable to evils 
so great ? 

Remove human freedom, and what is the result? Is it 
not the absence of that which is man's highest privilege 
and most exalted dignity ? Is God to be blamed because 
man so perverts his highest prerogative ? Because man's 
freedom can be made the instrument of his ruin, is that a 
reason why infinite benevolence should not bestow it? Must 
then there be, as the only alternative, the nature of brutes? 
Is the goodness of God to be impeached because there may 
be involved in the most costly gift a greater evil from its 
abuse ? Would it be a blessing to have no conscience, no 
freedom of choice, no exalted powers of man made in the 
image of God, because that very moral agency involves in it 
the essential power of free choice? Is compulsory virtue, 
virtue? Is forced freedom, freedom? Po we want to be 
brutified, with no other power to guide than instinct? Do 
we ask for mechanical action, and the disrobing of our na- 
tures of reason, of conscience, and the angelic power of moral 
faculties? Is such the price we would be willing to pay for 
exemption from moral evil ? 

But the fact that virtue, not happiness, duty, not pleas- 
ure, right, not joy, is the greatest good and our highest in- 
terest, relieves the subject of moral and physical evil of its 
greatest difficulty. So long as we look upon happiness as the 
greatest good, and the greatest happiness as the greatest end, 
the mind will insensibly fall into the notion of happiness as 
if it was subject to weight and measure, and the chief thing 



180 THE PROBLEM OF PHYSICAL 

to be considered in relation to man. Consequently we shall 
imbibe the idea of the present sj'stem with Leibnitz, as the 
best possible with God, and by onr peculiar theory of opti- 
mis.m directly, if not knowingly, limit divine power or good- 
ness. W^hat other inference but this, while happiness, not 
virtue, pleasure, not duty, is made the greatest good? But 
exalt the idea of right, the principle of virtue, above happi- 
ness, and then at once the inference is conclusive that hap- 
piness and pleasure, as subordinate, may before the higher 
principle of virtue and duty be sacrificed. The only question 
we ever need ask is. What will make us virtuous? not, What 
will make us happy? Then shall we judge not only that 
happiness is inferior to virtue, but must alwaj^s make way 
for it : so far then, under certain circumstances, have we any 
reason to doubt of the goodness of God because of the de- 
nial of happiness, that we are compelled to admit that a 
much hio^her blessino^ would be lost unless there was the 
sacrifice of happiness. 

The idea that suftering and pain, physical and mental, 
throw doubt upon the goodness of God is at once shown 
fallacious, when we consider that such suffering may be 
essential for the trial of virtue, — that the noblest develop- 
ment of virtue may be in a state of probation, — that the 
world, as a scene of discipline, may be the best possible for 
man a sinner, — that with wrong committed and liberty per- 
verted, there must be suffering and pain. Such an idea 
makes every objection to the goodness of God from the 
existence of evil altogether without foundation. The great 
law of our finite condition is progress, not attainment. 
Ilappiness, however great, is not the great end : virtue is the 
grand end. But virtue is action, not a state ; it implies 
effort, increase, constant progress. Happiness is being, 
virtue is doing ; consequently the cultivation of virtue — the 
giving to moral agents the noblest sphere for its exercise — 
is a higher end in creation than happiness. 

Temptation, evil, pain, trial, danger, may be necessary to 
secure the noblest end of virtue, i^one can say it is not so. 
^one can afiirm that God has not chosen the best system for 



AXD MORAL EVIL. 181 

such an object. ^N'one can offer the existence of evil as any 
objection to infinite goodness. Our moral constitution, the 
light of nature and revelation, teach us the contrary; both 
assure us that God is good. The divine benevolence is as 
boundless as the divine wisdom and power. The problem 
of moral and physical evil need not trouble a single mind; 
it has nothing in it to infringe upon the goodness of God. 
Our ignorance is the sole ground of our mistakes. We are 
constantly liable to overlook the greatest good in an inferior 
one. God, as infinite in his perfections, cannot be fully com- 
prehended by our finite minds, — finite in their progress. 
This only we know, we can place no limit to the power or 
to the goodness of God. How ungrateful are we to complain 
at God's works, — to imagine the fish should be elevated to 
the scale of quadrupeds, quadrupeds to men, and men to 
angels, — to be envious because some are more learned, or 
rich, or higher in the scale of being than ourselves, — to find 
fault, not with our want of virtue, but happiness, — to think 
we might improve upon the order of the universe ! How 
ungrateful to be spying out always the evils, and never to 
think of the blessings ! Is there to be no end to our 
captious questions ? 

But these questions force us to pass beyond the limit 
of human agency and human power, and lead us directly 
into the infinite sphere of divine power and benevolence. 
But let us abstain from language as thankless as it is useless. 
Let us bow before the infinite mind. Let us trust in the 
boundless goodness of God. Let virtue and eternal right be 
the end of our being, and then happiness, such as God only 
can give, shall be our portion. 

Most appropriately, upon the permission of evil, does Ho- 
race Bushnell remark : " So far, the possibility of evil ap- 
pears to be necessarily involved in the existence of a realm 
of powers ; whether it shall also be a fact, depends on other 
considerations yet to be named. One of the most valued 
and most triumphantly asserted arguments of our new school 
of sophists is dismissed in this manner at the outset. God, 
they say, is omnipotent, and being omnipotent, he can, of 



182 THE PROBLEM OF PHYSICAL 

course, do all things. If, therefore, he chooses to have no 
sin, or disobedience, there will be no sin or disobedience ; 
and if we fall on what is sin to us, it will only be a form of 
good to him, and would be also to us, if we could see for 
enough to comprehend the good. The argument is well 
enough, in case men are things only and not powers; they 
are, by the supposition, to act as being uncaused in their 
action, which excludes any control of them by God's om- 
nipotent force, and then what becomes of the argument? 

" But it will be peremptorily required of us, at this point, 
to answer another question ; viz., Why God should have 
created a realm of powers, or free agents, if they must needs 
be capable, in this manner, of wrong and misery ? Without 
acknowledging for one moment that I am responsible for the 
answer of any such question, and denying explicitly the 
right of any mortal to disallow or discredit any act of God, 
because he cannot comprehend the reasons of it, I will 
simply say in reply, that it is enough for me to be allowed 
the simple hypothesis that God preferred to have powers and 
not things only; because he loves character; and apart from 
this, cares not for all the mere things that can be piled in 
the infinitude of space itself, even though they be diamonds; 
because, in bestowing on a creature the perilous capacity of 
character, he bestows the highest possibilit}^ of wrath and 
glor}', — a capacity to know, to love, to enjoy, to be consciously 
great and blessed in the participation of his own divinity and 
character. For if all the orbs of heaven were so many solid 
Kohinoors, glittering eternally in the sun, what were they 
either to themselves or to him ; or if they should roll eter- 
nally, undisturbed in the balance of their attractions, what 
were they to each other? Is it any impeachment of God 
that he did not care to reign over an empire of stones ? If 
lie has deliberately chosen a kind of empire not to be ruled 
by force ; if he has deliberately set his children beyond that 
kind of control, that they may be governed by truth, reason, 
love, want, fear, and the like, acting through their consent; 
if we find them able to act against the will of God, as 
stones and vegetables cannot, what more is necessary to 



AND MORAL EVIL. 



183 



vindicate his goodness than to suggest that he has given 
them, possibly, a capacity to break allegiance, in order 
that there may be a meaning and a glory in allegiance, 
when they choose it ? There is, then, such a thing in- 
herent in the system of powers as a possibility of wrong ; 
for, given the possibility of right, we have the possibility of 



CHAPTER XXL 

THE NATURAL AND THE SUPERNATURAL. 

" The physical or immediate cause of any event," says Prof. 
Nichol on the solar system, " is merely that event without 
which as a precedent the other never occurs. We say that 
one event causes or brings about another, not because aught 
is visible — any peculiar virtue in the first event which neces- 
sitates the second — but because it is so arranged in the 
economy of the known universe that when the first happens 
the second always follows it ; and if we find events so ordered, 
that in a long series of changes they succeed each other in 
a certain recognizable plan, we term that observed plan the 
law of these events. The name, or word law, does not thus 
involve the idea or any controlling power: it is the mere re- 
sult of an observed succession, — the mode by which we thread 
together in our minds the different events which befall; and 
if the slightest element involving control is properly con- 
nected with it, it can only be in reference to the relation of 
such succession to spiritual or mental phenomena, and ulti- 
mately as it represents that Idea in the Almighty mind 
according to which the order in question was arranged. 

" Regarding Law, not as causative, but expressive, — as 
the simple indication of mighty arrangements, a gleam into 
the finite mind from that of the Creator, — surely the farthest 
stretch of vision which man can ever achieve is only a further 
disclosure of Almighty glory and excellency." 

The natural is peculiarly the sphere of the development of 
law as related to second causes, or causes dependent for their 
original power upon the First Cause. Now, whether this 
divine power is every instant of time felt energizing all 
second causes, and producing eflects through an immediate 
(184) 



THE NATURAL AND THE SUPERNATURAL. 185 

interposition of force in all cases, or whether a constitution 
is given under the name of nature that has in itself a power 
of causality distinct from the First Cause, that in certain sub- 
ordinate relations may be said as restricted to this constitu- 
tion to be developed from itself alone, yet one thing is 
certain, the nature of everything as made by God is always 
developed under its own laws; and this constitution, be it that 
of a stone, a tree, a iish, a bird, or quadruped, shows itself 
under natural laws specific to each thing or creature, and 
unfolding itself under a uniform principle of order and ad- 
justment. 

It is easy to see how this regularity in all natural law is the 
foundation of all the security and happiness of creatures, and 
why all human reasoning is based upon it. That God should 
give a constitution to everything appropriate for the end for 
which it was made, might easily be inferred from the fact 
that he has himself a nature, and that nature is the embodi- 
ment of all his infinite perfections. A correct idea of nature 
and its laws, as related to creatures or anything created, 
would dissipate the common illusion that regularity was 
always inconsistent with change, and uniformity with sus- 
pension. ITature never would be worshiped as the cause of 
all things, or natural law deified at the expense of its maker. 

But the great idea to consider is not so much what is the 
constitution of nature, or what are its laws, as what is the 
end for which this constitution was made, — what lies at the 
foundation of all these processes of nature, and for which 
they were instituted. In reply, we must consider that all 
natural law, and all the varieties of inanimate or animate ex- 
istence, have a relation to one grand whole, so that nothing 
exclusively is made for itself. Thus, nature is not only a 
process of development, each part aiding another, and all in- 
terwoven together, but nature has for its end the shadowing 
forth of the perfections of God and the display of his glor}-, 
be it in inanimate or animate creation. I^o other end on the 
admission of a God is possible or even conceivable. God 
must be in himself the infinite center and circumference of all 
existence, — all thought, all wisdom, power, and goodness, — 



186 THE NATURAL AND 

or we must deny the fundamental distinction between mind 
and matter, and make nature and its laws the only God that 
has a being, which would involve pantheism or materialism. 
To undertake to define with clearness what is the constitu- 
tion of nature, what are its laws and their relations one to 
another, has been the hopeless effort of philosophers in all 
ages. We can only say in popular language, what are the 
obvious phenomena of nature ; we can only classify its opera- 
tions under certain general laws ; we can only point the in- 
quirer into its secrets to a few of the outside properties of 
nature, and give specific names to each uniform diversity of 
action ; but bej'ond this, the highest, even as the feeblest, in- 
telli2:ence must ever be in the dark. 

Evidence most overwhelming is given to us to show that 
nature is not God, or God nature; and when we have arrived 
at the most obvious of all truths, that there is a God inde- 
pendent of nature, its author and preserver, then the most 
sensible of all inquiries must be, for what is nature made? 
What are the phenomena of its existence ? IIow are they 
developed, and what that individual and universal process 
which limit its operations ? It is not diflicult to reply to 
such questions. Mature, as the workmanship of God, must 
have a certain constitution, must develop itself under certain 
laws ; those laws must have enstamped the impress of uni- 
formity, of a regular process, of like effects following like 
causes, of invariability of action under similar circumstances, 
of constant manifestation under its appropriate conditions. 
But when the question is asked, must there never be any de- 
viation? must God never act above his natural laws, or give 
a new power, or impose new relations, or institute new con- 
ditions of development, or supersede these laws, or act in 
direct opposition to them ? This can only be answered by 
sajdng, that if there was a time when nature was not, if a 
period did exist when its laws had no being, if evidence con- 
clusive does show that nature itself is but a process of devel- 
opment, and, following the law of the separate parts that go 
to make it up, has revealed a birth, a maturity, and decline, 
then in the process of ages the grand whole may and will 



THE SUPERNATURAL. 187 

reach that stage where a total change shall pass over its ex- 
istence, and new laws and a new nature shall take the place 
of the old. 

In confirmation of this, science and revelation both agree ; 
they both point to the preadamite ages of the w^orld, to the 
evening and morning of those six days of creation, enstamp- 
ing on all material things the great law of i)vocess^ and 
disabusing the mind of an endless perpetuity to any existing 
manifestation of nature. The supernatural is peculiarly con- 
sistent with the past history of this earth ; it is absolutely 
essential whenever a new epoch of development comes into 
existence. It is impossible to argue from the existing regu- 
larity of nature's laws, that always this has been so, or that 
never it will cease to be as it is. We have the records of 
science and revelation to show that there was a time when 
the great fabric of nature, inclading our earth and its in- 
habitants, was first put up ; when new laws came in to carry 
out new adjustments and conditions ; when a new process was 
evolved from a pre-existent state, and nature put on a new 
raiment; when life sprang from death, order from confusion, 
and beauty from deformity. 

The question then presents itself, is there anything more 
than the natural? is the supernatural inconsistent with just 
ideas of God or nature? ^ot if past history teaches the con- 
trary ; not if the great end of creation must be to manifest 
the perfections of God ; not if the light we can gather from 
an investigation of nature, and the declarations of revelation 
show that there are times when either nature must be created 
or made anew, or there be interposed laws other and higher 
than any now existing. 

Most appropriately does Professor George Fisher remark : 
" There can be no doubt that a powerful tendency to panthe- 
istic modes of thought is rife at the present day. The popu 
lar literature, even in our country, is far more widely infected 
in this way than unobservant readers are aware. The laws 
of nature are hypostasized, — spoken of as if they were a self- 
active being; and not unfrequently the same tendency leads 
to the virtual, if not explicit, denial of the free and responsi- 



188 THE NATURAL AND 

ble nature of man. History is resolved by a class of writers 
into the movement of a great machine, — into the revolution 
of events with which the free will neither of God nor of man 
has any connection. 

" We are thus brought back in our analysis of the contro- 
versy with the existing unbelief to the postulates of natural 
religion. On these the Christian apologist forms the pre- 
sumption or anterior probability that a revelation will be 
given. It is more and more apparent that the cause of natural 
religion and that of revealed religion are bound up together. 
But the native convictions of the human mind concerninoj 
God and duty cannot be permanently destroyed. Atheism 
is an affront alike to the inquiring reason and the uplooking 
soul of man. Pantheism mocks his religious nature. It is 
inconsistent with religion, with prayer, with worship, — with 
that communion with a higher Being, which is religion. It 
is inconsistent also with morality in any earnest meaning 
of the term : for it empties free will and responsibility, 
holiness and sin, of their meaning. Every one who acknowl- 
edges the feeling of guilt to be a reality and to represent the 
truth, and every one who blames the conduct of another in 
the very act, denies the pantheistic theory. Conscience must 
prove in the long ran stronger than any speculation, no 
matter, how plausible. In the soul itself, then, in its aspira- 
tion after the living God, and its conviction of freedom and 
of sin, there is erected an everlasting barrier against the in- 
roads of false philosophy, and one that will be found to em- 
brace within the shelter of its walls the cause of Christianity 
itself." 

Thus it will be seen that nature and its laws do not con- 
flict with the development of the supernatural, for nature is 
the result of the divine workmanship, and natural law origin- 
ates from the constitution God imparts to nature. Panthe- 
ism and materialism both are based upon the deification of 
nature and shutting out God from his works. N'atural law, 
if either is true, must resolve itself into an unyielding fatality, 
and the utter denial of the supernatural. But admit the per- 
sonality of God, the fact that nature is only the work of his 



THE SUPERNATURAL. 189 

hands, and then the inference is inevitahle that the constitu- 
tion that he has given to it must be such that nature in its 
totality will as certainly pass through a change involving the 
necessity of the supernatural, as that any of its parts have a 
birth, maturity, and decline. If the end for which nature 
was made is to show forth the perfections of God, it must 
appear to the last degree improbable that an eternity would 
be given to it of the undeviating operation of natural law, 
and that no principle of change should be enstamped upon 
the works of God. It is the very foct that this uniformity is 
broken in upon, that undeviating regularity has its prescribed 
bounds, that natural law has its limits, that gives the highest 
proof of a power above nature, which makes nature the ser- 
vant and not the master; because God does interpose at 
times, and gives a new nature, and new development of law, 
and new relations and conditions of life ; because he does 
show that there is a birth, maturity, and decline, and that 
when the time comes nature itself must die without super- 
natural intervention, that God shows that the throne of do- 
minion is restricted to himself alone. But suppose this 
was not so, suppose nature had its eternal circuit of uni- 
formity, suppose natural law never was broken in upon, and 
all this visible earth, and sun, and moon, all this universal 
nature existed under an inflexible and eternal type of devel- 
opment, going round its endless circle of causality with no 
forces emerging but those evolved in the ages of the past, 
how certain the inference that nature must be God, or above 
God! 

Here we see the necessity of the supernatural. It is the 
great principle manifested in Providence, showing the de- 
pendence of the creature upon the Creator, and that the world 
is not a machine, having in itself wheels of perpetual move- 
ment. Take the idea of the supernatural away, and nature 
is reduced to a clock which, once wound up, runs forever. 
Thus', as we study the constitution of nature, we are im- 
pressed with the fact, ever growing in importance, that over 
and above the first setting in motion the machinery of the 
universe, there must be an ever-present power, above all 



190 THE NATURAL AND 

second causes, that superintends every instant the compli- 
cated forces of universal nature, adjusting, regulating, direct- 
ing and restraini-ng, giving to each part its respective limit, 
and combining the whole in one universal harmony. It is in 
this way that alone we can solve the great problem of the 
preservation of the universe, or account for the harmonious 
adjustment of those laws that in other respects would involve 
inextricable confusion. 

Without entering into the investigation of the scriptural 
meaning of the six days of creation, — as this more properly 
comes under the department of revealed theology, — it is only 
needful to say that all history and science confirm this won- 
derful record of the preadamite ages. The evening and the 
morning distinctly teach us of two different states of exist- 
ence, and foreshadow in each of the six great epochs of crea- 
tion the intervention of the supernatural to give a higher type 
of being to our earth. 

Most appropriately does Professor Tayler Lewis, in his 
work on the six days of creation, remark: "As surely as 
there is written on the rocks the long w^orking of regular, 
uninterrupted laws or methods, in which each step or stage 
seems to come out of what went before, and to have given 
birth to w^hat comes after (for this is the only consistent 
meaning we can attach to the word natural,) so surely is 
there found another record as strangely, and we may even 
say more unmistakably, engraved. From a higher world 
than the natural there must have been from time to time a 
sudden flashing in of the extraordinary, of the supernatural, 
of a new morning after the long night of nature; or, in other 
words, the divine power introducing, or bringing out, if any 
prefer the term, a new element, a new force, a new law, a 
new idea, call it what you will, accompanied with new 
methods, or laws for its subsequent growth or development, 
and then leaving it to their undisturbed operation." 

This is precisely the idea we have of the great distinction 
existing between the supernatural and the natural, which is 
found enstamped on the records of all history and all science. 
To conceive that an infinitely wise, powerful, and benevolent 



THE SUPERNATURAL. 191 

God would give up to nature all that which would peculiarly 
mark his own existence as independent and above nature, 
even as controlling it, is impossible. To believe this, a man 
must shut his eyes to every good argument addressed to the 
understanding, and be willfully blind to the clearest facts of 
history. The great reason for the supernatural lies in the 
necessity of revealing to all moral agents that God has nature 
under his perfect control, that he acts according to his own 
will, and cannot be conlined in his movements to the sphere 
of any natural law. To limit himself to this would be to 
hide the most sensible evidence of his personality and infinite 
superiority to nature, for nature is not, and cannot be, a self- 
perpetuating machine with no end. There is enstamped on 
all natures an inherent law of birth, maturity, and decline. 
It is seen in all vegetation, all animal existence; and if we 
carry the analogy into the history of nations as individuals, 
we see there also a process of infancy, growth, manhood, and 
decline; and could we measure the ages of inanimate exist- 
ence, of the solid earth and planets, as we do the days of our 
sun-measured lives, through the whole physical universe there 
would be seen a mighty cyclical law pervading, and making 
out as distinctly a limit to movement in time as there is en- 
stamped a limit in extension. Space would no more certainly 
have its boundary in the creation of worlds than time its 
limit in their existence. As the natural was never made to 
boast of an infinity of creations, so also it cannot an eternity 
of duration. An inherent necessity must be in nature to die 
out, or the supernatural never could reveal itself in its glory. 
Nature must have its constitution from God, and that consti- 
tution must teach the great lesson of its infinite inferiority to 
its author. But how teach this lesson, except by a vivid 
contrast with him ; how teach it unless it bears the impress 
of subordination and dependence ? God is unchangeable, in- 
finite, and eternal. I'^ature must be changeable, finite, and 
limited. It must spring from the supernatural, be controlled 
by it, and find its limit in it. Consequently, natural law, 
while it must be a rule to the creature, can be no rule to 
the Creator. God holds it in his hands as the charioteer 



192 THE NATURAL AND 

the reiDs of his fleet steeds, and while he permits them to ran 
in their appointed course, he yet controls those instruments 
which otherwise would bring ruin upon all. If, then, as far 
as our experience and observation go, as far as the teachings 
of science and history extend, we find no exception to that 
cyclical law that limits with equal certainty the age of the 
forest leaf as the monarch that roams the desert, the flower of 
the field as the life of man, the insect of a day as the oak of 
centuries, why should we hesitate to believe that the world 
may die out as certainly as the creatures that inhabit it ? Why 
should we refuse to credit the old age of the future, as we are 
compelled to confess that of the past ? All this may be true,- 
and yet a higher stage of existence be superinduced upon 
that which has ceased to be. A nobler life maj- be evolved 
from that life which is quenched in death. The naturalist 
alone must find everything to discourage him ; he never 
looks upon nature, however fair, but that he reads in every 
lineament the revolving wheel of birth and death. Not one 
of the vegetable or animal creation is an exception : he rushes 
for consolation to the solid earth; he welcomes inanimate na- 
ture ; he says, here is the changeless, the immutable, the 
eternal; here are laws whose uniformity is never broken in 
upon ; here are the ages that roll on in an undying regu- 
larity ; but, as he explores the buried-up archives of land 
and sea and rock, as he climbs the mountains or goes down 
into the deep caverns, he finds the extinct remains of species 
of animals that speak of a condition totally unlike the pres- 
ent; he finds proof of a pre-existing condition where even 
the denizens of the land could not live ; beyond this he goes 
where air and water could have no inhabitants, and ages be- 
yond he sees a condition where all must be chaos and night. 
Why, then, should he infer that the present is more perma- 
nent than the past; that the supernatural, so essential in ages 
that have gone by, may not be equally as desirable in the 
ages to come ? 

This is peculiarly evident when we consider that natural 
law only expresses the law of a part of nature, — that nature 
is made up of an endless variety of things, and that each of 



THE SUPERNATURAL. 193 

the numberless parts of nature has its own law, and can only 
exist by a proper adjustment to the whole. So when natural 
law is spoken of, the question must always arise, What law? Is 
it the law of the atmosphere, of heat, of gravitation, of chemi- 
cal combination, of vegetation, of animal growth, or of any 
thing else? Now, the word nature simply means the present 
constitution of things with all its variety of laws ; and to 
speak of this constitution as eternal and its laws as change- 
less, is to belie all history and science as a fact, without any 
attempt at explanation. We know that supernatural inter- 
vention has always marked the ages of the world. The very 
end for which the world was made, for which its varied in- 
habitants were created, reveals the great fact that nature 
has enstamped upon it a higher impress than that which 
secures its present action. The whole follows the same 
law that is the condition of the individual parts. The 
circle of existence is no more endless than the process of de- 
velopment, — the finite is as true in duration as the limit 
of worlds in space. A higher power must intervene to give 
a new impulse to the worn-out machinery of natural law ; 
must impart to the old nature a new power; must bring it 
under new conditions, and place it upon a nobler scale of de- 
velopment. When the time-piece of the old world runs 
down, then another supernatural intervention must wind it 
up, and from the ruin of the past evolve a better creation. 

" The position we have reached," says Professor Tayler 
Lewis, "is that all natures — lesser natures, greater natures, 
specific natures, general natures, the one universal nature — 
have all one law of growth, maximum, decline, ortus, transitus, 
interitus; and that if one outlives one or more revolutions, it 
is only to go round in a similar cycle, with a corresponding 
law of decrease at each repetition. In other words, the 
cyclical law^ is the law of all natures, or, as we might say, the 
nature of all natures. If we are not satisfied with any attempted 
a imori proof, there is the inductive, or a posteriori argument 
derived from experience. This may be very limited, but it 
knows of no exceptions. It is decidedly against the doctrine 
of any eternal progress severed from the idea of the super- 

18 



194 THE NATURAL AND 

natural, as far as we can judge, from ' the things that are 
seen;' this is the process of all natures. They all repeat 
themselves, they all have a tendency to run out. We see it 
everywhere in the natural world. We discover it, more- 
over, in existences of a higher character, which, although 
not strictly belonging to the physical in their essence, have 
their manifestation in connection with it. We trace it to 
some extent in the moral world, in social and political 
systems, in psychological developments, in intellectual and 
literary periods. These, too, have their growth, maximum, 
decline. A nation has its birth, youth, manhood, and old 
age. What we call the -'age,' too, presents often the same 
manifestation. But in nature, strictly, as far as our observation 
can extend, there are no exceptions, — none that are such, even 
in appearance. Some of the periods are but for moments, — 
that is, moments in our modes of estimation, — some are for 
hours, some for days, for seasons, for years, for ages; but in 
all the same cyclical law reigns predominant. Each has its 
birth, its youth, its age, its perfection, and its imperfection, its 
growth, its decay, its reviviscence, its winter, its spring, its 
evening of torpor and repose, its new morning, when, like the 
sun in its circuit, it again sets out to run its appointed round 
as one of the lesser wheels in the Gilgal Toledeth, or the 
great wheel of the universal nature. 

" Unless, therefore, the Scripture expressly contradicts, we 
cannot resist the conviction that would convey this analogy 
from the lowest to the highest manifestation in the physical 
universe. As we go back from solar days to seasons, from 
seasons to years, from years to lesser times of plants and ani- 
mals, from these to ages that witness the growth and decline 
of species and genera, we cannot reject the thought that there 
are still higher c/^^s, and seasons, and years. God and nature 
cannot be supposed to stop short with our sense, and our his- 
tory, and our inductions. The ever-widening spiral carries 
us upward to the ages of ages — the alib'^aq ra»> alwvw^ — pos- 
sessed of the same cyclical character, and during which God 
employed the same cyclical law in the production of worlds, 
and Scripture does not forbid it. To one who will read it 



THE SUPERXATURAL. 195 

aright, the whole aspect of the sublime account in Genesis is 
consistent alone with such a view, while it is greatly aided by 
those remarkable expressions in other parts of the Bible, 
where the utmost power of language seems taxed to convey 
one, the idea of the vast duration of God's kingdom (his visible 
outward dynamical kingdom) in the ages that preceded the 
growth of our world as well as in those that are to come. 
From all this we infer not only the fact^ but the absolute ne- 
cessity, of repeated creative or supernatural acts ; and this not 
only to raise nature from time to time to a higher degree, 
but to arouse and rescue her from that apparent death into 
which, when left to herself, she must ever fall. The super- 
natural becomes the originator of a new nature, or the re- 
storer and vivifier of an old ; but this, too, in time runs out, or 
tends to run out. There comes again the evening, the win- 
ter, the period of growing torpor, from which a new creative 
word alone can recall the dying cycle; and hence the neces- 
sity of such word, not only to the higher progress, but to the 
very existence, of the universe. So also in the moral world. 
Here, too, we trace a similar analogy, if not the same law. 
In the moral as well as the physical kingdom, there is extraor- 
dinary manifestation, the new life, the powerful growth, the 
apparent decay, and then the long reign of ordinary moral 
causes, until, when the spiritual seems almost sunk in the 
natural, God comes forth from the ^hiding-place of his 
power,' and there is a new exhibition of the supernatural 
word and supernatural grace, reviving everything from its 
night of torpor and decay. It is something more than a 
metaphor when such reviviscences are styled a momng, and 
the period they usher in, a day, — a day of light, a day of life, 
a day of power, a day of the right hand of the Most High. 
Such days as, we may yet expect, are coming upon the Church 
and the world." 

So full of importance is this forcible presentation of a sub- 
ject that must ever involve the deepest mystery, that the mind 
naturally lingers long in the contemplation of those ages that 
have called forth, and always will call forth, the highest inter- 
position of the supernatural ; and the question arises, Why, 



196 THE NATURAL AND 

« 
when a line is so distinctly drawn bet\Yeen God and liis 
works, nature and its author, the law of the natural and the 
supernatural, is there room in the human mind at all for the 
vagaries of pantheism and materialism, or the degrading 
systems of heathen superstition ? ^Vhy does human philos- 
ophy carry with it so much the impress of ungodliness, and 
tend so universally to the denial of God, or the removing 
liini from bis works ? If humanity was sinless, would not the 
tendency he as natural to view God in his works as that of 
the law of heat to expand ? But considering the universal 
friction of sin, are we not compelled to admit that the moral 
disease that blinds the mind and hardens the heart is the 
real solution to those difficulties that are presented in human 
belief and practice ? 

Arnold has well remarked, in one of his sermons, " The 
clearest notion which can be given of rationalism would, I 
think, be this, that it is the abuse of the understanding in 
subjects where the divine and human, so to speak, are inter- 
mingled. Of human things the understanding can judge, of 
divine things it cannot ; and thus, where the two are mixed 
together, its inability to judge of the one part makes it de- 
range the proportions of both, and the judgment of the whole 
is vitiated. For example, the understanding examines a mi- 
raculous history: it judges trul}^ what I may call the human 
part of the case, — that is to say, of the rarity of miracles, of 
the fallibility of human testimony, of the proneness of most 
minds to exaggeration, and of the critical arguments affecting 
the genuineness or date of the narrative itself. But it for- 
gets the divine part, namely, the power and providence of 
God, that he is really ever present among us, and that the 
spiritual world which exists invisibly all around us, may con- 
ceivably and by no means impossibl}' exist at some times, and 
to some persons, even visibly." 

Thus it will be seen that the admission of a personal God 
brings with it the admission of nature dependent upon him, 
brings with it the reasonableness of the supernatural, and in- 
volves its development in accordance with no other law than 
simply the will of the Creator, a power put forth that can be 



THE SUPERXATURAL. 197 

shown only by the simple fact, and which will ever in its 
philosophy elude the highest researches of the human mind. 

Revealed theology comes to us presupposing the great 
truths of natural theology. It enters into no proof of the ex- 
istence of God, of creation, of conscience, of the fall, of hu- 
man sinfulness. These are the very foundations upon wdiich 
it builds; they are the axioms, self-evident, universally ac- 
knowledged, of all divine theologj^; the}' form the admitted 
propositions, felt and seen, and known to be never denied 
with the shadow of reason ; and yet while denied the}' can 
only be through an agency and cause that has its very seat 
in the perversion, the prostitution, and, if possible, the abne- 
gation of an element in human nature that God has placed as 
the first and last witness of himself, even the conscience. 

If the question is asked, Why is revealed theology denied ? 
the answer must be found in the fact that some, if not all of 
the axioms of natural theology are forgotten, ignored, or 
positively rejected. It has been our object to show that the 
natural, which is the sphere especially of second causes, must 
involve the supernatural in some way. God must be the 
First Cause of nature, and the parts which go to make it up 
must intimately depend upon him. '' Man uses machinery," 
says G. Cummings, " a lever to move a weight — but wo do 
not consider the power as in th^ machinery or the lever; as 
in this instance the machinery does not render unnecessary 
the agency of man, so do not secondary causes exclude the 
agency of God." 

Our idea, then, of all secondary causes, is simply that in the 
world of matter the action is ah extra, while in the spiritual 
world it is ah intra. Matter has its principle of movement 
from without, mind from within. The constitution of nature, 
in relation to both mind and matter, will, therefore, be in ac- 
cordance w^ith the law of each, except in those cases where 
all natural law is suspended, or superseded, or made to give 
way to another and totally different law. What that law will 
be can only be decided in the mind of God himself. There 
are innumerable cases where the supernatural is simply above 
all natural law, where it means only a new force that is in- 



198 THE NATURAL AND 

fused into the old law, a new enero:v that ogives hio-her efii- 
ciency to the natural, and enables it to accomplish what 
otherwise it would not. 

Then, again, the supernatural may assume the type of 
originating matter, introducing substances and their laws that 
never before existed, as when the first matter was made, or 
the first man. These all comprehend a distinct and perfectly 
difterent application of power from that which subsequently 
is manifested. Then, again, the supernatural may be seen 
acting in direct opposition to existing laws, and producing 
eftects not only above all natural laws, but setting them alto- 
gether aside, as in raising the dead to life. The type of the 
supernatural in relation to mind and matter, may have as 
varied an application as that manifested in natural laws. It 
may be concealed in its operation, with difficulty discrimi- 
nated from the known operation of nature, or it may be as 
obvious as the lightning fiash, and compelling conviction of 
the direct agency- of God in the dullest intellect. Especially 
in relation to mind the supernatural may be, and often is, 
more concealed, for mind presents a profounder depth of 
mystery even than matter, and therefore where most un- 
known there may be most frequent the direct agency of God. 
And yet the view we entertain of the supernatural, and its 
frequent occurrence when concealed, does not conflict with 
the exercise of man's free moral agency, or make impossible 
the freedom of human volition with the existence of second 
causes. The law of the mind and that of matter are totally 
distinct in this respect, — that matter is passive and must be 
acted upon, the force applied must be from without, while 
mind acts from within, is self-caused, and therefore can, in per- 
fect consistency with the supernatural, have connected with 
it the element of individuality, of voluntariness, and free- 
dom. It therefore exists under limitations, but not the limit- 
ations of matter. As originating from the First Cause, it 
must be dependent upon it, and yet that dependence be such 
as to exalt it to the highest stage of moral responsibility, and 
bring reward or its opposite. 

Here, then, we see nature under innumerable modes of man- 



THE SUPERNATURAL. 199 

ifestation, and expressive of substances totally distinct, each 
having their own laws, and each in their existence and dura- 
tion bounded b}^ the law that exists in the divine mind. We 
follow^ on the great chain of causation, and we reach finally 
the last link that is upheld by the hand of God. The super- 
natural is above, below, wathin, and around the natural. As 
we resolve the forces of nature into their simplest elements, 
we find behind them all more recondite forces that have 
eluded our investigation; we go deeper and deeper still into 
our analysis of the causes that keep the wheels of life in mo- 
tion, or in the inanimate creation we submit to chemical law 
the different substances of nature ; and yet the most subtle 
processes of the chemist teach us the great lesson that there 
are causes at work, bound up in elements, that can never be 
analyzed or understood. One thing, however, w^e do know, 
that no inconsistency would be so great, no absurdity so mani- 
fest, as to confound the natural and the supernatural in the 
same thing. 

Most appropriately does Professor Tayler Lewis remark, 
" If any one ask, Why does God work in this w^ay ? What 
need has he of natures? we can only say, ^ So it seemeth good 
in his sio^ht.' He could doubtless have made all thino's dif- 
ferently, but then we know it would not have been the best 
way, because he has not adopted it. He works through na- 
ture, or a succession of natures, no one developing another, 
yet each preparing the w^ay for the one that is to succeed. 
We see enough of the universe to know that this is the 
method, and, thus considered, the general view is unaffected 
by the measures of duration. It is of no importance to the 
argument wdiether the flow seems more or less rapid as 
viewed from our stand-point, or as measured by the shorter 
periods of that exactly divided physical system to wdiich our 
thinking, that is, our flow of ideas, has become confirmed. It 
is still the great principle, w^hether it appears in the growth 
of the fungus, the ' son of a night,' in the growth of the plant 
that lives for years, in the growth of a tree that endures for 
centuries, in the growth of worlds wdiose cyclical law extends 
through seons of ages, embracing a duration equal perhaps to 



200 THE NATURAL AND 

millennial or millions of niilleiiiiial recurrences of such cycles 
as are made by our exact sun-measured years. It is the great 
principle for which we contend; and, this established, it cer- 
tainly ought to guide us in our interpretations of a record 
which professes to reveal the creative acts of God. If we thus 
view nature as a stream of causation governed by a certain 
law, which not only regulates, but limits, its movements, then 
the supernatural^ as its name imparts, would be all above na- 
ture, — in other words, that power of God which is employed 
' according to the counsel of his own will,' in originating, 
controlling, limiting, increasing, opposing, or terminating 
nature, whether it be the universal, or any particular or par- 
tial, nature. Thus regarded, the supernatural would assume 
various aspects, to which we may give distinctive names. As 
originating nature, we may call it the ante-natural: as adding a 
new force to a previously existing nature, it may be styled 
preternatural, although there are some uses of the word that 
might vary from this idea. If such new power, though 
higher than the previous nature, is in harmony with and 
works through it, tlius producing a higher order of results, 
though still through it and by it, then it may be named the 
connatural, since in this manner, in connection with the old, 
it truly becomes itself a new nature. AVhen the divine power 
is in immediate and direct opposition to nature, breaking 
through its laws, and producing events the opposite of what 
would have come out of its unobstructed sequences, then 
may we rightly call it the contra-natural, — such as those inter- 
positions that are generally termed miraculous." 

From this contemplation of the supernatural, it will be 
seen that it must be totally opposed to those great errors 
that for ages have been developed in the history of man. 
Consider that type of error that goes under the general 
name of superstition. The tendency of the human mind 
perverted is like a pendulum, to sw^ing between the two 
extremes of superstition and infidelity. By a logical ne- 
cessity, the mind not Christian must trust to one of these 
two extremes of false belief or no belief. It must confide 
in a system that degrades reason or deifies it, or trust 



THE SUPERNATURAL. 201 

in the true God, and the supernatural as shown in natural 
or revealed theology. 

Under the aspect of superstition will come all the varied 
forms of polytheism that have existed and do now exist in the 
world. But polytheism, as its name imports, is the religion of 
many gods. It consists in the degrading of God to a human 
level, and giving supernatural qualities to creatures. It is 
the deification of nature under its endless forms. Polytheism 
has been the prevailing sin of heathendom in all ages. It is 
especially attractive to the ignorant masses of society. It 
saves the trial of thought, investigation, or the discipline of 
reason and virtue. It o-i'^itifies in some sense the relio-ious 
craving of man, wdiile it obliterates the most needful distinc- 
tions to guide in the way of truth. The great error of all 
superstition lies in attaching divine qualities and the super- 
natural to creatures, or the objects of inanimate nature. It 
will easily be seen that the polytheistic element must always, 
with the multitude, ignorant and depraved, be more power- 
ful than that of any other form of delusion. It appeals im- 
mediately to the senses. There is much in it to gratify the 
aesthetic nature and take captive the imagination. It pro- 
fesses to quiet the conscience under its load of guilt. It does 
not limit itself to one form alone of worship. Its gods 
are as varied as the capiMce or passions of the nature. Its 
objects of adoration are as numerous as the heart could de- 
sire. The supernatural is not restricted to one god alone. 
Thus ancient as well as modern polj^theism has its uniform 
type of the degradation of the true God. It worships in the 
creature those qualities that are but the deification of human 
selfishness, lust, and passion. The human, with all its infir- 
mities and all its passions, is exalted to the divine, and con- 
sequently the people, too ignorant to understand, or too 
willful to learn, have been made the victims of priestcraft and 
the most revolting superstitions. The chains of spiritual 
slavery have been forged and riveted upon millions of the hu- 
man family, simply by lowering the supernatural to the natu- 
ral, and substituting false idols in the place of the true God. 

IN^ature-worship, commencing first with the sun and moon 



202 THE NATURAL AND 

and stars, soon degenerated into that of the earth, air, water, 
lire; and then, assuming a higher degree of grossness, there 
came the adoration of dead heroes, elevated to demigods ; and 
then the persons of living emperors were made divine, and 
worshiped as more than human ; and from this the descent was 
rapid to the heasts of the field, to lizards, crocodiles, snakes, 
and even the insects. Xow, all this degradation of the human 
mind arose from the false ideas entertained of the supernatu- 
ral, and the confounding it with the natural; it sprang from 
giving to nature and its objects those powers that alone be- 
longed to God. The polytheistic element has even assumed 
the garb of Christianity, and, while it has spurned the more 
revolting forms of superstition, yet has borrowed from the 
heathen w^orld precisely the same element that makes it so 
opposed to true religion. 

In Romanism, while the unity and the personality of God 
are admitted, yet divine honors are paid to saints, to angels, to 
the Virgin Mary, and the supernatural is ascribed where only 
the natural belongs. The great peculiarity of Christianity is, 
that it draws wide the line of distinction between the natural 
and the supernatural ; it makes out God infinitely different 
from and above his workmanship. But polytheism, by remov- 
ing this distinction, and ascribing the supernatural to the ob- 
jects of nature, animate or inanimate, and especially to beings 
having human infirmities, passions, and sins, ends in invert- 
ing all moral traits. Virtues by it have been made vices, and 
vices virtues. The worship of the heart being directed into 
a wrong channel, adoration itself has been made an insult to 
God ; and the more superstition has secured the control of hu- 
man nature, the more it has deteriorated alike in true knowl- 
edge and virtue. But if polytheism has been the religion of 
the ignorant, pantheism has been that of the educated. The 
polytheist has gods many, the pantheist makes all things God. 
The one turns into a wrong channel the w^hole religious na- 
ture, the other blocks up that channel with the rubbish of a 
false philanthropy. The former blunts all the moral sensi- 
bilities, the other refines them away. Both, as they take cap- 
tive the mind and heart, are idolatrous; but the idolatry of 



THE SUPERNATURAL. 2C3 

the poljtheist is specific and sensible, while that of the pan- 
theist is general and vague. The supernatural, with the 
former, is the common quality of all his idols ; with the latter, 
the general condition of everything or nothing. God, in the 
one, is degraded to nature; in the other, nature is elevated to 
God. In both the true God is denied or forgotten, because 
all the qualities that distinguish God from nature are obliter- 
ated. The injury done to the moral nature is most marked. 
If in pantheism ideal or materialistic human responsibility 
is ignored, in polytheism it is misdirected. The pantheist, 
mero^ino: himself into the one universal substance, becomes 
simpl}' a passive recipient of influences that absolve him from 
all accountability. The polytheist has his responsibility 
divided or destroyed by the conflicting divinities that usurp 
the worship of the heart. By the one class God is degraded 
to the low level of sinful humanity, by the other his attri- 
butes of personality, freedom, and holiness are refined away; 
and thus man floats on the sea of destiny as the straws of 
mere caprice, his own existence an enigma, to be swallowed 
up at last in the infinite ocean of universal being. Truly, the 
belief of the pantheist is as mournful as that of the polytheist ; 
for to be dashed by an insane pride upon the rock of inexor- 
able necessity is quite as sad as to be drowned by the love 
of idols in the turbid waters of sensuality. 

The evil of pantheism is not restricted to modern times. 
It entered deeply into all the literature and philosophy of 
the ancient world. Under different forms it flourished. In 
Greece and Rome it was the common infirmity of all the edu- 
cated classes. Disgusted with the imposture and priestcraft 
of the state religions, the natural revulsion was infidelity, and 
this became plausible only as it took the form of pantheism. 
-Unable to live without worshiping something, the educated 
mind of the heathen lapsed into pantheism; for pantheism 
allowed the deification of nature; and, discarding the super- 
natural altogether, it permitted just that exaltation of hu- 
manity that flattered the pride of the more cultivated por- 
tion of society. Consequently, it entered largely into the 
tenchings of the Stoics and the philosophers; it taught the 



20-J: THE NATURAL AND 

doctrine of a relentless necessity, and gave to nature the typo 
of an unalterable fatality. By obliterating the chief distinc- 
tion between vice and virtue, it relieved the mind of jthe 
dread of responsibility, and became the more attractive as it 
gi-atified the pride that took away the fear of punishment. 

Pantheism was the natural revulsion of the mind from the 
grossness of superstition ; simple atheism was too negative, and 
not so congenial to the religious sensibilities. It was easier 
to imagine everything God than nothing; to suppose nature 
an external emanation from the Deity, uncreated like him- 
self and a part of hie being, than to deny the existence of 
any God whatever. Modern pantheism is only the ancient 
dressed up in a new garb ; it involves essentially the same 
process of thought, and leads to the same results. The same 
conchisions are reached by Spinoza and Ilegel, that the 
devotees of the old [pantheistic philosophy arrived at; 
both begin by making no distinction between God and na- 
ture, denying the divine personality, and end by removing 
from man that freedom which involves accountability. 
Thus it will be seen how false ideas of the supernatural have 
so much to do with the development of polytheism and pan- 
theism : they must lead to some form or other of superstition 
or infidelity. 

The existence of the supernatural is also opposed to the 
postulates of deism, and every system of modern philosophy 
which holds to the sufficiency alone of reason to guide man. 

Modern infidelity assumes two forms : one, that which 
holds to the sufficiency of reason alone in religion ; the other, 
that which trusts implicitly to the intuitions and the feelings. 
The former declares that the reason is enough to lead into 
all essential truth and guide in the way of virtue ; the latter 
insists upon the sensibilities as a source alone to be depended 
upon ; both declare that the supernatural is unnecessary, and 
cannot be proved. It is said that the mind can learn enough 
to guide from the works of nature, and, as this shows an infi- 
nite God, why seek for more evidence or knowledge of his 
perfections ? 

The supernatural is discarded simply upon the ground of 



THE SUPERXATUFAL. 205 

tlie uniformity of natural law. But history and science, as 
has been seen, conclusively establish the position that this 
uniformity is neither uninterrupted nor eternal, and that mir- 
acles, if impossible with man, are possible to God, and have 
actually taken place. If, then, the mind turns to the present 
or past condition of humanity, there is certainly nothing to 
encourage the belief that man does not need the supernatu- 
ral to help in his difficulties, or more truth than nature gives 
to guide in his ignorance. The infidel, who looks alone to 
his reason, or his intuitions and feelings, cannot find in the 
unspeakable degradation of heathen nations anything to con- 
vince him of their sufficiency. The question may well be 
asked. If the light of nature is all that man wants to guide to 
the knowledge of God, why has it not done this ? If natural 
theology is amply sufficient to make mankind truthful, useful, 
and virtuous, then what means the mass of human ignorance 
and vice existing ? 

Deism rests for its main support upon the idea of the im- 
possibility of miracle, and the undeviating uniformity of 
natural law ; but it must throw aside science and history, 
ignore all the evidence of testimony, and trust itself to an 
assertion that is at war with all just ideas of God. The su- 
pernatural is not contrary to reason, or impossible ; it is not 
contrary, for that which is above the reason is not therefore 
opposed to it; nor is it imjyossible, for that which God has done 
he may do again. Thus deism, which calls the reason alone 
sufficient for the discovery of truth and the practice of vir- 
tue, discards the supernatural ; because to admit it would be 
to confess that human necessities demand something more 
positive and reliable than the reason. 

The infidel, who holds to the supreme authority of the in- 
tuitions and the feelings, comes to the same conclusion, while 
the road walked in may be altogether different. The sensi- 
bilities may be as wrong as the reason, and equally as unsafe 
as the ouly guide to truth or virtue. It is just as proper for 
a man to say that his reason is God's only revelation to him, 
as his feelings or his intuitions, and equally as pernicious in 
practice, if either assumption leads to the denying of the 



206 THE NATURAL AND 

supernatural. The real question of the present day, is that 
involved in a true idea of the supernatural. 

Reason discards superstition, but it finds no better home 
in the baseless fabrics of those schools of philosophers who 
resort to materialism or idealism for support. The infidelity 
that ends in denying human responsibility cannot get rid at 
least of the conscience and the orreat fact of human o-overn- 
ment; and while both make man accountable for his conduct 
to man, with irresistible logic they point to a higher source 
even of authority and law, that will not release any person 
from obedience upon the fatalistic idea of man being simply 
a machine. All correct ideas of theism, then, must lead to 
the supernatural, as the only remedy against the deification of 
natural law or the delusion of pantheism. The pendulum of 
human belief may swing now in the direction of superstition, 
and now in that of the opposite error of pantheism; but one 
thing is certain, the human mind will never find its point of 
rest, never reach the line of an exact equilibrium, where faith 
may repose itself in the absolute certainty of truth, and 
human reason reach the rock where safely it may build for 
eternity, until it confidently trusts in the interposition of the 
supernatural wherever infinite wisdom and benevolence may 
dictate, independent of advice or help from any creature or 
thing. 

How necessary, then, that we should welcome all the light 
that comes from history and science, to show the actual de- 
velopment of the supernatural ! Why is it that infidelity, that 
trusts to the sufiicienc}' of reason and the light of nature, 
should be so anxious to deny the supernatural ? Is it not 
because, if admitted, it would compel to the reception of re- 
vealed theology, and with this the whole system of doctrines 
upon which it is based ? So long as the uniformity of natu- 
ral law is regarded as perpetual, and nature the sole cause of 
all existence, it will always be true that revealed religion will 
be denied. But the distinction has been shown between the 
absolute and the finite, the uncreated and the created, and 
that all nature must have its limit in those cyclical ages that 
make indispensable the interposition of miracle. However 



TEE SUPERNATURAL. 207 

second or final causes may be manifested in nature, yet all 
have an appointed circle of duration, and when that is com- 
pleted, the supernatural must intervene to restore, resuscitate, 
or create a new nature. Consequently, nature is not a ma- 
chine of unending movement, but something dependent on 
the supernatural for its life as its first origin. 

The professed aim of Christianity is to distinguish between 
the supernatural and the natural, and deliver from the fatal 
errors of superstition. Unlike infidelity, it places nature in 
its true relations to God ; to the reason it is a guide, and to 
the sensibilities a restraining and regulating power. The 
first end of infidelity is to discredit the supernatural. It 
denies its reality altogether, or confounds it with the delu- 
sions of superstition. The reason and the sensibilities being 
made out the onl}^ guide, and nature the sole cause of all 
things an emanation from God, or simply a part of that sub- 
stance which is infinite and eternal, absolute and uncreated, 
the natural tendency is to a belief that sin is a misfortune 
rather than a crime, and that what is called the supernatural 
is on\y a more recondite process of nature or subtle develop- 
ment. It is said that nature's laws are not fully understood, 
and that a person must wait patiently until a higher stage of 
science and knowledge will account for that which seems to 
be supernatural. The whole argument is based upon the 
assertion that reason, the intuitions, or the sensibilities, are 
alone sufficient to guide mankind, and that nature is the only 
volume open for instruction ; but to read that volume as it 
should be read, is not the aim of the infidel. By making 
nature divine, and her law^s immutable and eternal, God is 
as effectually shut out from the mind and the heart as if no 
God existed. Superstition, with all its errors, admits human 
responsibility and guilt, although it directs in a wrong chan- 
nel the religious nature ; but infidelity seeks to extinguish it, 
or to smother in delusive abstractions the deepest convictions 
of the heart. Consequently, when infidelity finds a lodgment 
in the mind, it first begins by denying the supernatural, and 
then by deifying the natural. But there are truths in natural 
theology that confront the infidel at the very door of his 



208 THE NATURAL AND 

speculations, and which he must meet before he can show 
tliat his nature-worship is sensible or right. 

The great fact of the supernatural, under the imposing as- 
pect of the miraculous, is constantly meeting him in science 
and history ; and when it is viewed under its more concealed 
aspects, it shows itself as the essential law that supports na- 
ture and preserves the universe from ruin. The power of 
God can never be shown to be delegated absolutely or ex- 
clusively to second causes. Give to nature as much as possi- 
ble the mechanical aspect, and yet underlying all its move- 
ments there is a divine energy that imparts the real force that 
makes all the wheels move. Because miracles so seldom are 
seen, and only at those great epochs of time when nature 
must have a new nature, or when the old nature must be re- 
suscitated, or when some crisis of momentous interest in the 
moral world necessitates it, this yet is no argument against 
the existence of the supernatural. The reason why the mi- 
raculous should be of seldom occurrence is apparent; but this 
does not prove that other forms of the supernatural are ever 
wanting. Could we see the intimate dependence of nature 
upon God, could we observe how all the diversities of sensi- 
tive existence and all the complicated mechanism of the 
ph^'sical universe do really hang upon his will, are directed 
by his purpose, and made to act through his sustaining 
power, we should then look upon the supernatural as the 
normal condition of all nature, and the natural as related to 
it as intimately as cause and effect, God would be seen in his 
works, worshiped as the author of all blessings, recognized 
in all existences, and believed upon as infinite in all perfec- 
tion. Man, to achieve the highest moral elevation, must avoid 
equally superstition and infidelity; for, while the former con- 
founds the natural with the supernatural, the latter makes out 
only the natural existing, and this is his god. 

But the ways in which the supernatural may exist and yet 
not be recognized are innumerable." It may act with nature, 
giving it only another direction, concealed, indeed, but not 
the less real. Then it may be a new energy imparted in the 
spiritual world ; and from this mental acts and feelings may 



THE SUPERNATURAL. 209 

originate impossible before. Then it may act through second 
causes, in the way of new thoughts, new motives, new im- 
pulses, and this may be done in such a way as most effectu- 
ally to secure the object desired. It may give in prayer a 
more than mortal wisdom and directness, or it may answer 
it through countless varieties of adjustment of means to an 
end higher than the natural, and yet in alliance with it. 
Through the whole department of the physical and spiritual 
universe it may be present, now helping, now changing, now 
suppressing, and now adjusting the forces of nature, so that 
without ever acting as in miracle against nature, it may yet 
secure an end with a certainty as great as that of the 
highest exertion of creative energy. How near the natural 
may be to the supernatural is only faintly shadowed forth 
in the words, " In him we live, and move, and have our 
being." This is not mere metaphor: in a sense most vital 
and true, God is spoken of as near to man, and near to all 
the natures he has given, be they physical or moral. 

The great element that distinguishes Christianity above all 
superstition and all infidelity, is the revelation of the coexist- 
ence of the human and the divine : the coworking of the 
natural and the supernatural, each in their distinct sphere, 
and yet each as truly as if only the human or the divine had 
any action whatever. 

The supernatural, then, is made known to us as existing in 
many ways concealed, and then in the open method of mira- 
cle. It may be often a power above nature, and altogether 
distinct from it, and 3'et be an energy bringing about the 
most important effects, undistinguished in the mind from the 
common operations of nature. But the great cyclical law 
holds all natures with a grasp that none can elude ; there does 
come a time when the longest, even as the most ephemeral 
of created things, must have an end. The undying youth of 
anything made by God is possible only by the interposition 
of miracle. God never confers immortality as the necessary 
condition of any nature, — no nature is thus independent of 
him. The inspired word declares the immortality of soul 

14 



210 THE NATURAL AND 

and bod}' in the resurrection state, but it is only through the 
interposition of the supernaturaL 

An inherent power of endless life apart from this can 
never be predicated of any creature, however exalted in virtue 
or intelligence. God reserves to himself alone the power of 
an endless life; and when he bestows it on any nature it 
must come under the law of the supernatural, and not the 
natural. Xow, all infidelity overlooks this essential condi- 
tion common to all natures, general or specific. Looking 
only to the regularity of natural law, it forgets that this does 
not constitute the efficient cause, and that the endless per- 
petuity of anv nature can no more be shown to be its normal 
condition than can the origin of any nature be proved to be 
without miracle. If creation involves the necessity of the 
supernatural, equally true does endless existence. 

Infidelity, then, is just as unreasonable as superstition, and, 
in some aspects, more pernicious. While boasting of freedom 
from its bondage, it yet leads to the very region and shadow 
of death ; it forces man to the experience of a desolation, 
where, upon the altar of an insane pride, there is sacri- 
ficed all that can truly bless in time or save in eternity. It 
calls itself free, but it is that freedom that grasps at the 
shadow and loses the substance. Having none of the elevat- 
ing truths of Christianity to guide or console, and nothing to 
trust in but the poor light of human philosophy, it makes 
more truly hopeless the condition than the gross delusions of 
superstition. It rejoices in the idea that there is nothing 
supernatural, that nature itself is eternal, and her laws alone 
that deserve obedience or esteem ; but the idea of God, 
however unwelcome, can never be altogether excluded from 
the mind. If the infidel makes out, in his own mind, con- 
science, responsibility, and divine law a dream, yet he will 
find it impossible to shake it ofi['; it will follow the nature 
more persistently than the waking hours of the day, and 
plunge it, though ever so reluctant, in one long night of 
gloom. 

What is there, then, that infidelity can stand upon, whether 
it takes the form of rationalism, deism, materialistic, or ideal 



THE SUPERNATURAL. 211 

pantheism, or atheism? What can be made out of nature 
with the supernatural denied? Does it prove no God 
and no miracle ? Is its voice that of chance or fatalism ? 
Does it call itself eternal, or an emanation from the infi- 
nite ? Does it show law never changed or interrupted ? 
Is not its whole history that of birth, life, and death, of 
ages measured by great or lesser epochs of time, all under 
that mighty cyclical law that extends over the whole uni- 
verse? Does it not teach the lesson of highest interest that 
there is no creature or thing, no existence animate or inani- 
mate, that is not as dependent on the Almighty for its being as 
its creation ? And whether that being shall survive in any in- 
stance the universal law of all natures, must depend alone upon 
the interposition of God, imparting that which nature is power- 
less to perform. 

Most truly has Horace Bushnell, in his work on ISTature 
and the Supernatural, remarked : " God is expressed but not 
measured by his works; least of all, by the substances and 
laws included under the general term nature. And yet how 
liable are we, overpowered, as we often are, and oppressed by 
the magnitudes of nature, to suffer the impression that there 
can be nothing separate and superior beyond nature. The 
eager mind of science, for example, sallying forth on excur- 
sions of thought into the vast abysses of worlds, discovering 
tracts of light that must have been shooting downward and 
away from their sources, even for millions of ages, to have now 
arrived at their mark, and then, discovering also that, by 
such a reach of computation, it has not penetrated to the 
center, but only reached the margin or outmost shore of the 
vast fire-ocean, whose particles are astronomic worlds, falls 
back spent; and having, as it were, no spring left for another 
trial, or the endeavor of a stronger flight, surrenders, over- 
mastered and helpless, crushed into silence. At such an 
hour it is anything but a wonder that nature is taken for the 
all, the veritable system of God; beyond w^hich, or collateral 
with which, there is nothing. For so long a time is science 
improved upon by nature, not instructed by it; as if there 
could be nothing greater than distance, measure, quantity, 



212 THE NATURAL AND THE SUPERNATURAL. 

and show nothing higher than the formal phatitude of things. 
But the healthy, living mind will, sooner or later, recover 
itself. It will spring up out of this prostration before nature 
to imagine other things, which eye hath not seen, nor ear 
heard, nor science computed. It will discover fires, even in 
itself, that flame above the stars. It will break over and 
through the narrow confines of stellar organization to con- 
ceive a spiritual kosmos, or divine system, which contains 
and uses, and is only shadowed in the faintest manner by, the 
prodigious trivialities of external substance. Indeed, I think 
all minds unsophisticated by science, or not disempowered by 
external magnitudes, will conceive God as a being whose 
fundamental plan, whose purpose, end, and system, are no- 
wise measured by that which lies in dimension, even though 
the dimensions be measureless. They will say, with Zopliar, 
still, — ' the measure thereof is longer than the earth, and 
broader than the sea ;' and the real, proper universe of God, 
that which is to God the final cause of all things, will be to 
them a realm so far transcending the outward immensity, 
both in quantity and kind, that this latter will be scarcely 
more than some outer gate of approach, or eyelet of obser- 
vation." 



CHAPTER XXII. 

THE HUMAN, THE SUPERHUMAN, AND THE DIVINE. 

The human must comprehend all that which is in accord- 
ance with its constitution. The constitution must be that 
which is in acordance with its nature. Human, constitution, 
and nature, all mean the same thing as related to man. But 
what is man's nature, unless it be that which embraces both 
his body and mind? Is not his nature comprehensively the 
physical, mental, and moral parts of his constitution ? If 
this is so, is it not a contradiction to speak of any part of 
man's nature as supernatural? The great idea all attach to 
the human is simply that which pertains to the nature of the 
human, and, therefore, that which is manifested in accord- 
ance with- the laws of the human. All that is human is 
therefore natural, so far as man's constitution is concerned; 
and all that is natural must therefore mean all that acts in 
accordance with the laws of the natural. 

But it is said human volitions act outside of the line of 
cause and effect, and therefore are supernatural. But cause 
and effect cannot be restricted alone to the inorganic, organic, 
or animal kingdom. It cannot be said that man in his voli- 
tion is an exception to this law, because man is free in his 
volitions. Those who hold this theory overlook the brute 
creation, and do not consider that, in some respects, if true, 
it must also hold real with brutes, so far as they have any- 
thing corresponding to the human mind. The great mistake 
many make in reasoning upon cause and effect, is that they 
imagine it to be the same in mind as in matter, and because 
in the physical world matter is passive, and must be acted 
upon ; and the result invariably follows the same, from like 
causes, with no possibility to the contrary, that this must be 
equally true in the spiritual world. 

(213) 



214 THE HUMAN, THE SUPERHUMAN, 

But human volitions are self-caused, they are ab intra, and 
with full power to the contrary, and therefore must be volun- 
tary, free, and unforced. Cause and effect in the world of 
mind are essentially different from cause and effect in the 
world of matter. I^ecessity rules in the one, freedom in the 
other. Consequently, to illustrate mental and moral effects 
by any analogy taken from matter, is unphilosophical, even 
as it is opposed to the intuitive convictions of the under- 
standing. And yetj in a real sense, all conduct proceeds 
from motives; and there is always an influence as certain, in 
the moral world, to be followed by effects, as exists through 
the 2:reat law of cause and effect in the world of matter. 
Does an}' conduct lead to the idea that motives have had 
nothing to do with that conduct? Is it not the peculiar pre- 
rogative of the mind that it is susceptible to motives, and is 
influenced always one way or another by motives? 

In that department of nature where cause and effect are 
ab extra, we see the manifestation of a law of force irresisti- 
ble? we can always say that such effects will follow invariably 
such causes; and therefore the idea of freedom is altogether 
wanting, and it is wanting because there is no power to the 
contrary existing. But in the world of mind and human 
volition it is essentially different. Because a man acts from 
motives he is free, for there is always, ab intra, a power to the 
contrary. Thus the true idea of moral freedom is invariably 
power to act differently from that which is acted, and always 
power to act free in the very volition that leads to vicious or 
right conduct. There is first a self-conscious power in the 
very act of choice, and then a perfect conviction of the mind 
that a different course might be pursued. But if men act 
from motives, then motives are a cause in conduct just as 
truly as force is a cause in making a ball fly through the air. 
But here consists the great difference, the ball is passive, and 
has no power to resist the force applied, and must always act 
the same with the same force applied, — like results will in- 
variably follow from like causes ; but the mind has not only 
the power to choose in all motives, to be influenced by one 
and not by another, but it has a twofold freedom : — freedom 



AXD THE DIVIXE. 215 

in the very act of choice, and freedom before this act to the 
contrary. It has the highest evidence of this in conscious- 
ness, and in all its feelings and thoughts in relation to the 
conduct of others. 

But still we know that conduct is as much the result of 
motives presented as it is free in the act Of choice, ^ow, 
many have drawn the inference that because men act from 
the strongest motives, that men must act from them, and that 
conduct is as much the result of necessity as the rolling of a 
stone is the result of force, and consequently human volitions 
are not free. Here a double mistake is made : first, by con- 
founding action ah intra with action ah extra^ that self-caused 
with that acted upon, a development under the condition of 
inherent activity with that of essential passivity ; and secondly, 
by asserting that all choice proceeds from the strongest mo- 
tive ; but the only plausible argument for this is simply assert- 
ins: that whatever brins^s about a certain result or effect is for 
the time being the strongest motive, and inferring this because 
the law of the strongest force always holds good in things; 
but persons are not things because there is absolute freedom 
to choose from the weaker motive as truly as from the 
strongest motive, and in the case of sin because the weaker 
motive does really exist to bring about choice. The greatest 
motive to a man is himself; and endless confusion has fol- 
lowed this vain effort to weigh motives in the same scales 
in which sus^ar and salt are weio^hed. The fact is, that con- 
duct must be the result of motives, for it is an absurdit}' to 
predicate choice with no influence, and therefore such influ- 
ence must be in a true sense a cause of action. 

All human volitions are absolutely free to take up with 
anv motive whatever. This beins^ so, it is doino- the cause 
of moral freedom the greatest possible injustice to fasten on 
to it the old theory of the strongest motive. In the sense in 
which the term very often is used it leads to fiitalism, and 
creates a doctrine of necessity that is peculiarly pernicious 
to that responsibility to which God and man hold us for our 
conduct. It is begging the question to say that the strongs 
est motive to a man is that which secures his choice. This 



216 THE HUMAN, THE SUPERHUMAN, 

is the very thing in dispute. It is simply saying, because a 
man acts from such a motive, therefore it is the strongest, 
and it is the strongest because he thus acts. IsTow, all this is 
assuming the very thing to be proved. Why may not God 
make the human mind free to act from any motive, strong 
or weak ? Why may not the very idea of guilt be involved 
in taking the unworthy, the weak motive, in preference to 
the noble and the strong? Why may not self-consciousness 
declare that its great sin consists in disregarding the rational, 
the good motive, and taking up with the irrational and the 
foolish motive ? The fact is, the man determines the motive 
vastly more than the motive the man. 

And this leads us to consider that what passes under the 
phrase, the strongest motive, is the most general, vague, and 
loose of all expressions, and is used to mean much or little 
as a man may please. The ideas comprehended in the word 
motive are the most complex imaginable. It comprehends 
everything that influences the mind; and what is it that in- 
fluences the mind ? Who can tell? It may be that without 
us or that within us ; the internal or the external ; other 
persons or ourselves; it may have reference to things ani- 
mate or inanimate; feelings or perceptions, and a thousand 
and one things which cannot be described. 

Is it not then irrational to talk about the strongest motive 
as if it was as susceptible of weight as a pound of cofiee? 
Is it reasonable to believe a necessity exists in it to act from 
it as irresistible as that which brings a stone to the ground ? 
Upon a certain class of minds this method of reasoning is 
peculiarly unhappy; it drives them to the repudiation in vo- 
litions of the law of cause and efiect, or the making out all 
human volitions as supernatural. But we shall show that 
the strict meaning of the supernatural is that which is above 
nature, that which nature cannot do. 

But is human volition not in accordance with the very na- 
ture God has given to man, his very constitution? Is not this 
humanity, with its complex powers, really natural, as distin- 
guished from the supernatural? The fallacy of those who 
call human volitions supernatural, is found in the fact that 



AXD THE DIVINE. 217 

they overlook the truth that the mind was made to act natu- 
rally as much as the body; to act according to its nature, and 
as certainly as the action of the brute creation or the inor- 
ganic kingdom: but, says the objector, mind is a power. 
Very true, and so also the lioness fighting to save her young 
is a power. The human power may be a very diiierent 
power, but it is not for that a supernatural power. Mental 
activity never can go farther than its nature permits, no 
more than physical power. The supernatural should only be 
used as restricted to the divine. What is supernatural is 
that which God does. The sphere of its activity is the divine, 
while the natural is the sphere of the human. The error in 
makiilg all human volitions supernatural is quite as great as 
that of denying altogether the supernatural. If the one leads 
to infidelity, the other verges far into pantheism. Xature is 
simply the constitution God has given to things and persons 
— to his kingdom, be it inorganic, organic, animal, human, or 
angelic. It is a comprehensive term, embodying everything 
made in distinction from the maker. And the supernatural 
is that which is above nature, or any power in it, be it phys- 
ical or mental. It is of great importance that this distinction 
should be clearly defined and resolutely held to. Give it up, 
and the whole doctrine of inspiration as a divine influence 
is thrown into confusion, and no line really, with truth, can 
be drawn between the supernatural in that which man does 
and the supernatural in that which God does. It is quite as 
important that the mind should be disabused of the sophistry 
conveyed in the phrase, the s&ongest motive. Man is not a ma- 
chine because it acts ab intra, is self-caused, and can choose 
any motive whatever. The great sin in man lies in the fact 
that it is abnormal, irrational, contrary- to the strongest mo- 
tives of right, happiness, affection, and goodness. It is a war 
of the lower nature against the higher, passion against reason, 
pride against humility, lust against purity, violence against 
order, intemperance against temperance, avarice against pru- 
dence, and hatred against love. The reason why the language, 
the strongest motive, is held by us as always applicable to the 
action of the mind, is because we insensibly fall into the idea 



218 THE HUMAN, THE SUPERHUMAN, 

that what is true of things is also so of persons. Cause and 
effect in things is always as the strongest force, and there is 
no power to the contrary. In things all is necessary, uni- 
form, and inevitable. Thus, like causes produce like effects 
under all circumstances and occasions But in mind the law 
of causality is altogether distinct. There is no possible 
analogy between the two. The diff'erence is as radical as the 
nature is distinct. 

In all language we indeed speak of motives as the cause of 
volition, because the mind is made to be influenced by them, 
yet its freedom of action is the essential condition of its ex- 
istence. The mental constitution is made for freedom, as 
much as the air for breathing, and this freedom has a two- 
fold character — power to act differently from what is done, 
and then power to choose any motive whatever, strong or 
weak. Why, then, is the language, the mind always acts 
from the strongest motive, so common ? First, because we 
fall insensibly into the idea that the mental constitution is a 
sort of machine; secondly, because we confound the success- 
ful motive with the strongest motive. The mind always does 
act from the successful motive, for this always is chosen in 
preference to any other. But does this mean that what in- 
fluences is in itself always the strongest motive? Have 
motives weight, as stone? Does not conscience declare that 
in sin the weakest motive is chosen ? Does not folly pecu- 
liarly consist in taking up with the most insignificant con- 
siderations, and overlooking the greatest? Is not the very 
guilt of wickedness, that it is so irrational, so senseless, so 
destitute of all worthy motive? We cannot get round this 
by saying that such motives to the wicked are the strongest ; 
they are the successful motives, because they secure the re- 
sult. But strength and success are not convertible terms. 
The true idea of freedom is, that while it is the law of the 
mind to act from motives, it is equally the law of the mind 
to take up with any motive, and free always to do differently 
from that which it does do. The ambiguous phraseology of 
the strongest motive leads into materialism, or into the fatal 
error of necessit}'. In this sense we hold to the self-deter- 



AND THE DIVINE. 219 

mining power of the will ; not that motive has nothing to do 
with the will, but that the will can act from any motive, and 
always with power to the contrary. We contend that all this 
action of the mind is natural, because it is in accordance with 
the constitution God gave it. Volitions are as natural in the 
spiritual world as gravitation in the material : the one is a 
mental power, the other a physical power ; one is free, the 
other necessitated ; one self-active, the other acted upon. 
Force in the material world is always blind, in the spiritual 
world intelligent; in one it has the essential characteristic of 
necessity ; in the other, of liberty. 

Holding, as we do, to the most unrestricted idea of freedom 
in human volitions, and in no respect disposed to encumber 
it with the ill-defined and unfortunate phraseology of the 
strongest motive, believing that it is the man that determines 
the motive^ vastly more than the motive the man, and that 
motive is the most' complex of all ideas, and cannot in any 
true sense be defined in many cases of volition, and feeling 
that no language should be used to impair in the least human 
accountability and freedom, yet we cannot for a 'moment hold 
to the opinion, full of danger to all correct ideas of inspi- 
ration and the divine action upon men, that volitions are 
supernatural. The supernatural is the divine, as distin- 
guished from both the human and the superhuman. What 
is the superhuman ? It is simply that which is above the 
power, or transcends the strength of man. We read that 
other beings exist besides the human : now, the exercise of 
their power must be superhuman. Angels have a nature as 
truly as men, but not the same nature: all their actions 
must therefore be superhuman ; and if we could conceive of 
an order of beings higher than the angelic, it would be true 
that the action of such beings would be superangelic, as their 
action is superhuman ; but in no true sense could their action 
be called supernatural, for it is not above their nature, it is 
as their nature., and therefore must be natural. To do away 
with this distinction is to throw the greatest obscurity upon 
the whole subject of the divine influences and power. 
We believe God takes exclusively to himself the preroga- 



220 THE HUMAN, THE SUPERHUMAN, 

tive of the supernatural, for nature must, in innumerable 
ways, be under his influence and control. All human or an- 
gelic volition is in accordance with the constitution God 
gives, and whenever action in either is above that constitu- 
tion, then it is through the influence of the supernatural, and 
the glory alone belongs to God. The idea of inspiration is 
simply the influence of the Almighty on human thought 
above the plane of the natural, and transcending all creature 
power. The miraculous always includes the supernatural, 
but the supernatural does not usually the miraculous. If it 
is said that either, or both, act in accordance with law, it is 
only true in the sense that this law is the will of God him- 
self. The whole subject of law, as applied to the Deity, is 
simply the method he proposes to himself, and what that 
method is can only be known to God. 

The divine, then, as disthiguished from the human or the 
superhuman, is simply the supernatural as the method of God 
in relation to all his action in the world of matter or mind. 
It embraces all degrees of the divine action, in controlling, di- 
recting, or creating things or persons. It is the divine power, 
as distinguished from all creature power. Consequently this 
action of God must possess in its nature something essen- 
tially distinct from all creature action, and all developments 
of mind or matter. The supernatural is the sphere of God 
alone, while nature, or the natural, is the sphere of all crea- 
ture activity, be it human or angelic. It then should be 
always remembered, that when the human mind acts above 
the natural, or transcends the limits of the natural, then the 
reason is simply it is under the control of the supernatural. 
This is always divine, the energy of God himself coming in 
contact with human activity and thought, and bringing about 
those results thafwould be impossible if the natural only was 
relied upon. This view of the supernatural is peculiarly con- 
sistent with all correct ideas of second causes. Second 
causes, in matter or mind, are the powers that are manifested 
in both, and which grow out of the constitution of both. A 
cause is force, force is power, and power is simply producing 
results. [N'ow, the doctrine of second causes, material or im- 



AXD THE DIVINE. 221 

material, is based upon the fact that God has given to every 
nature its own peculiar constitution, — that this constitution 
has its own laws, and these laws are revealed by the activi- 
ties of all natures in every department of God's kingdom. 

To contend that there is only one cause, and deny second 
causes, is simply the essence of pantheism, and all fatality as 
applied to human conduct. It means that human action is but 
a mode of the divine action, and consequently no such thing 
as human responsibility. But we contend that God can make 
second causes either necessary or free. lie can give to crea- 
tion a nature with iw liberty^ as well as a nature with liberty. 
This is what in human and angelic creatures he has done. 
But the great First Cause must reserve for himself the sov- 
ereignty of creation ; and while he gives all the freedom that 
the creature can have, he certainly- will not disrobe himself 
of the supernatural, in directing and controlling all things in 
subserviency to the highest good of the universe. It is for 
this reason we object so strongly to the use of the super- 
natural, as applied to human or angelic volitions. Xeither 
man nor angel can act above his own nature, or by any in- 
herent energy get beyond the sphere of second causes. All 
causality must be absolute or dependent: absolute in God, 
for no restriction is admissible in it; dependent in creatures, 
because it is God's gift, and confined to the nature he has 
given: that nature may be necessary- or free; its energy may 
be ab extra or ab intra, and show either the irresponsibility of 
things, or the accountability of persons. 

Consider then how the divine acts upon things and per- 
sons. Things are influenced by those forces that, corre- 
sponding with their nature, invariably bring forth the same 
results from the same causes. The law of causality in things 
is in accordance with the principle of necessity, that admits 
of no deviation, no change, no development outside of that 
influence that uniformly brings about like results from like 
causes. Things always demand, in all action, two or more 
conditions : one the external force applied, the other the ob- 
ject which receives this force. There must not only be two 
or more conditions, but a corresponding relation between 



222 THE HUMAN, THE SUPERHUMAN, 

them. Thus oil and water do not mingle or combine, but 
sugar and water do. But when we come to persons we see 
the law of causality within. 

There is an inherent power to choose between motives, to 
act freely from any motive, to resist or yield to any influence 
brought to bear upon the mind by motive. A person is self- 
caused, he is made a rational being, and this means the ability 
to take up with right or wrong motives. But a person could 
not be a person and not be susceptible to motives from the 
world within him or without him ; he could not be a person 
and yet a passive being, with a constitution where motives 
could have no power. Things are not the objects of motives. 
We do not reason with them, we cannot converse with them, 
or teach them, or persuade them. There is an impassable 
gulf between things and persons, for blind force is at an in- 
finite remove from intelligent force. But a creature could 
not be a creature and yet exempt from the law of cause and 
effect. A man must choose something, he must act from 
some kind of influence, good or bad, or he would be neither 
a thing nor a person, and this would be an absurdity. The 
divine, then, when it comes in contact with the human, when 
a supernatural influence is made to bear upon the mind, is, 
unless a direct miracle is worked, always in accordance with 
the laws of the mind, giving a higher energy, or a new di- 
rection, to those laws acting with the natural, while above 
it, and ordinarily undistinguished from it; but in no true 
sense can such action of the human be appropriated as its 
own exclusively. The divine influence that secures the effect 
within the sphere of the natural, while truly above it, must 
be considered the procuring cause of this effect, and to God 
alone the glory belongs. 

It will be seen how this view of the divine, as distin- 
guished from the human or the superhuman, gives to it the 
noblest aspect w^ien made the object of human desire or 
effort. If the human never acts above the natural, then the 
supernatural is the reason, and this will throw the great- 
est light upon the whole subject of inspiration, and teach us 
that what distinguishes the Bible above all other books is. 



AXD THE DIVINE. 223 

that it carries about with it the ineifaceable impress of the 
supernatural, the stamp of the divine, while all other books 
are the offspring of the natural. 

If now a person should ask, What is a miracle ? we reply, 
First, it is not a natural effect; second, it does not lie within 
the sphere of the human or the superhuman to accomplish. 
An angel may work wonders, and do that which, done by a 
man, would lead immediatelj^ to the inference that it was 
supernatural ; but this action of the angel was simply super- 
human, above that which a man could do, but not that which 
an angel was made to do. As human beings, we might not 
be able to distinguish between supernatural agency and super- 
human, but as angels we should, for then we would be con- 
scious of acting only in accordance with the nature God has 
given us. When, then, we get beyond the domain of things, 
or that of the irresponsible brute creation, we come to that 
lofty sphere where God speaks of man as made in his own 
image, and a being into whose nostrils he breathed the breath 
of life. Here we reach the condition of moral accountability, 
and that of persons that, however varied in the scale of crea- 
tion, do yet all owe allegiance to God, and by him are 
held responsible for their conduct. 

Thus we have contemplated the human, the superhuman, 
and the divine, for the great object of showing that the super- 
natural is to be restricted to the working of God alone, outside 
and above the realm of nature, and then to show that the law 
of cause and effect can hold as true in the spiritual world as in 
the material, and yet be perfectly consistent with moral free- 
dom, and not only consistent with it, but the foundation upon 
which it must rest, and the only principle by which charac- 
ter can be formed in harmony wnth true liberty and respon- 
sibility. Under the action of the human we then classify 
everything that comes under the power of the human and 
its laws. Under the superhuman we mean effects produced 
by powers above the human, and yet in perfect consistency 
with their nature, and according to natural laws imposed 
upon superhuman beings by God. While under the divine 
we mean always the supernatural, and that which God only 



224 THE HUM Ay, THE SUPERHUMAN; 

can do. We hold this distinction of the greatest value in 
having any intelligent idea of inspiration, and in its applica- 
tion to the great themes of revelation. We helieve God 
made hoth men and angels to act according to the nature he 
gave them, and in harmony with the laws of their being, 
and therefore all such action must be natural, always except- 
ing those cases where the supernatural is interposed to help, 
or control, or secure, a higher end than the inherent powers 
of their own natures could secure. The divine coming thus 
in contact with the human or the angelic, is God's own 
method of securing in nature those results which give the 
highest permanency and glory to his kingdom. Miracle is 
the highest method of the supernatural, and will only appear 
when needful to secure effects of the highest value in the 
mind of God. 

What, then, is sin ? It is, in the moral world, a condition of 
unnature, a perversion of moral power, a spiritual deformity, 
an abhorrent estrangement from those laws that, obeyed, 
would secure everything blessed and happy. Sin is acting 
against God, against his system of nature, against his will, 
against his order of creation, an insult to the supreme au- 
thority of Jehovah, and an abortive effort in the creature to 
thwart the end of his kingdom. 

What is sin toward self? It is moral suicide, the nourish- 
ing of a cancer in the constitution, that, uncounteracted, un- 
repented of and unforgiven, will bring with it death to the 
soul. Sin is something that works ruin to the nature as cer- 
tain as any derangement of the physical system : rather, sin 
is a derangement affecting both soul and body, and must be 
arrested in its course, or irretrievable ruin is the result. If 
this is sin, we see why the interposition of the divine, in hu- 
man affairs, is so indispensable ; and why miracle, to secure 
certain ends in the moral recovery of man, is so much to be 
desired. 

The interposition of the divine in human affairs, is so much 
the necessity of man a sinner, that were it dispensed with, 
we should see no hope for the salvation of man. 

We see, then, from the derangement sin has introduced 



AXD THE DIVINE. 225 

into the world, from the disorder engendered by it in the 
material and immaterial creation of God, how essential it is 
for reversing this fatal tendency of evil that the supernatural, 
under all its varied forms, should exist, and even miracle be 
sometimes revealed to counteract the mischief that sin would 
bring upon the individual or 80ciet3\ But miracle is the 
manifestation of the divine power, on such occasions and 
under such circumstances as most impressively to convince 
the mind that God does what, in no sense, natural law could 
do ; that even there is a suspension or setting aside of the 
laws of nature, and the clearly-defined impress of the work- 
ing of a Being who holds all laws under his perfect control, 
and can, with infinite ease, bring about results that transcend 
all creature activity or wisdom. Thus, miracle may be de- 
fined as the highest order of the divine power, securing 
eft'ects that do not come under the ordinary sphere of the su- 
pernatural, and only worked upon occasions of the greatest 
importance to God. Miracle, then, may well be described as 
something more, and far different from the common provi- 
dence of God, — the putting forth of his almightiness, accord- 
ing to the method of his own wisdom, and which is concealed 
in his own mind. 

Considering the supernatural and the divine as sjmony- 
mous, and miracle as the especial revelation of the divine, 
we are compelled, whenever we consider the terrible disor- 
der of sin universal over the earth, to admit, under a personal 
God, the necessity of just that kind of interposition to relieve 
the wants of the human family, that is made known to us in 
the Old and,]N"ew Testaments, and to confess that miracle, 
under the circumstances of its manifestation as recorded in 
the Bible, is peculiarly suitable and appropriate for the great 
end of human redemption. 

Believing in miracle, as so essential in the restoration of 
man under that divine system disclosed in revelation, we 
would, for this very reason, look with the greatest suspicion 
upon all miracles that do not carry upon their face the 
evidences of the Bible, and cannot claim for their working 
those divine proofs that give to real miracles their credibility. 

15 



226 '^^^ HUMAN, SUPERHUMAN, AND DIVINE. 

But especially would we make heaven-wide the distinction 
that separates the divine power from the human or the 
superhuman, and recognize always in the supernatural that 
which is only divine, which not only is above all creature 
power, but is as far removed from the power of the created 
as the nature itself of the infinite is removed from that of 
finite. 



CHAPTER XXIII. 

LIMITATIONS OF HUMAN THOUGHT. 

The proper object of inquiry for the human mind is not 
so much what is the subject-matter of nature and revelation, 
not how the facts presented in both are made to harmonize 
one with another, as what is the character of the human 
mind and the essential limitations of thought. It is idle to 
speculate upon worlds beyond the range of the telescope : 
within the sphere alone of its power can the astronomer make 
his calculations. Facts and theories are widely different. 

Consider, then, the natural limitations of the mind of man, 
and how differently individuals are affected by the same facts. 

The consciousness and the senses are the two great instru- 
ments of human thought, — one internal, the other external. 
Take away any of the senses, and the mind is unable to com- 
prehend the facts that properly come under the sense that is 
removed. The blind man can have no idea of color, or the 
deaf man of sound. So of the consciousness : w^hile unable to 
define it, we yet know that the different degrees of reflection, 
reason, judgment, imagination, as well as the different states 
of- the emotional part of our nature, all have a most intimate 
connection with it, and give to its action clearness or am- 
biguity, strength or weakness. The first thing that marks 
the human mind is its variety of development in different 
persons. ITo two persons are alike in their minds or bodies. 
Some have minds extremely weak and some strong ; some 
excel in memory and some in judgment; some possess 
great natural powers of reflection and others of observation ; 
some show great inventive faculties, others seem only able to 
imitate. The texture of some minds is coarse, that of others 
refined. Undoubtedly, there is an original and essential 

(227 ) 



228 LIMITATIOXS OF 

difference in the minds of different persons. Just as no two 
trees of the forest are alike, and no two blades of grass are 
exactly equal in shape, or color, or texture, so one of the 
clearest marks of the individuality of the human race will be 
found in the variety that exists among all who people this 
world. This being so, must mould the ideas of every per- 
son. The same facts may be admitted, but there cannot 
be in all the same ideas connected with those facts. The 
same truth may be confessed by two persons, and yet this 
truth impress the consciousness of the one very unlike what 
it does the other. It is, then, evident that this difference in 
the minds of persons arises not only from circumstances in 
which they are placed from education and the force of habit, 
but from an original and essential variety in the minds of all. 
The natural faculties do differ in strength, energy, compre- 
hension, and acuteness in all persons. There is as much 
a gradation in the scale of mind as in that of the develop- 
ment of the body. The essential distinctions existing in the 
material world only shadow forth distinctions as wide and 
great in the intellectual and moral world, and these distinc- 
tions all are consistent with personal freedom and accounta- 
bility. The mind sympathizes intimately with the body ; 
they mutually act and react upon each other. This being so, 
the inference is unavoidable, that different persons have a 
limitation in their ideas respecting material and immaterial 
things, corresponding with the original and essential varieties 
of mind existing in the world. What some may comprehend 
most clearly, others may not; what maybe intuitively ob- 
served by some, may be altogether unseen by others, l^ot 
the mind only, but the emotional part of the nature, is widely 
affected by the same things in different persons. 

Thus, take the original differences in the human faculties, 
and then those differences as modified or increased by edu- 
cation and habit, and we see the widest gradation in human 
thought with a corresponding limitation. But in addition to 
this limitation of thought, so different in persons of the same 
age, there is, with every one, a peculiar development of mind 
from early infancy to old age. That the human race came 



HU3IAX THOUGHT. 229 

into the world with anything that may be called innate ideas 
it is impossible to prove ; so far from this, there is very clear 
evidence to the contrary. Faculty and idea are not the 
same ; faculties of thought, perception, and feeling, unde- 
veloped in a restricted sense, must exist in infancy. The 
senses and the consciousness, as the mere instruments of 
thought and feeling, must have lying back a nature, with 
faculties capable of thought and emotion under appropriate 
circumstances; but infancy commences with no ideas, but 
simply with faculties that, under certain conditions in action, 
will develop thought and feeling. iSTow, the process of human 
life is a process with a commencement with no ideas, but 
simply original faculties of emotion and thought, gradually 
developing into specific and expanding ideas and feelings. 

Thus, we see not only in different persons an original 
limitation of mind, as diverse as individual existence, but this 
limitation diminishing with the progress of infancy into 
youth, manhood, and maturity of life. The powers of the 
human mind strengthen, and the mind expands with the in- 
crease of years. All this must be taken into consideration in 
the speculations of the reason. The reasoning power in one 
man is very different from that in another, and then it is also 
a thing of graduaj development, commencing in every per- 
son with only faculties in a crude and undeveloped state : 
the mind shows itself absolute, with no ideas in the first 
dawning of its existence, for faculty and ideas are not the 
same, no more than the flint and the spark that is struck by 
concussion from it ; and then there is, under appropriate con- 
ditions, a growth of mind as striking and varied as the growth 
of the body. 

Consider, then, the limitations of the mind out of itself, — 
limitations in relation to God, to his creation, material and 
immateri-al. Consider the simplest ideas with the individual. 
The primary idea is that of 7, a person, as distinct from other 
persons and the outward world. But what is the source of 
this idea? Evidently the consciousness. Suppose the rea- 
son attempts to prove this first truth of our existence. Can 
anything more conclusive be said than I think, therefore lam ^ 



230 LIMITATIONS OF 

And jet the whole force of this argument is found only in the 
individual consciousness. The idea of distinct personality is 
traced alone to the same source : from our idea of finite 
personality we ascend to the idea of the infinite personality 
of God. The great axioms of all truth, or rather the highest 
truth, are found in the consciousness. But the limitation of 
our minds is such that not only we cannot go back of the 
consciousness for higher proof, we must take its decisions just 
as they are, without imagining that any effort of reasoning 
can make them clearer. The great facts of consciousness by 
no process of argument can be improved upon : rather, elabo- 
rate speculations only tend to obscure the mind respecting 
these facts. All human action is based upon the admitted 
facts of consciousness, teaching the great truths of free agency, 
of accountability, of right and wrong. And yet, what limita- 
tion of mind in respect to the most clearly admitted facts of 
self- existence I Xot to go beyond the individual, what an 
impenetrable veil presents itself to human reason in that 
which constitutes the essence of soul and body ! This is just 
as evident when we consider the union of the soul and body; 
how body acts upon mind, or mind upon body; how the 
spiritual combines with the material, or how life enters into 
the organism of the human frame, — all is as unexplained to 
the mind of the adult as to that of the infant. The one 
knows just as much of their mystery as the other. Let a 
finite mind expand ever so much, let it grow to the capacity 
of a Milton, a Newton, or a Bacon, and it will be found that 
there are limitations of thought in every person never to be 
done away with. 

But this is more evident when the world is contem- 
plated. How we come into this world, live in it, or leave 
it, beyond the apparent outward phenomena of life and 
death, are subjects of the profoundest mystery. We see 
nothing of this great earth beyond the contracted horizon of 
our own individual consciousness and observation. Our own 
limited thoughts give to us all we do know of self and the 
outward world ; and yet think how extreme is our limitation 
of thought in respect to the most familiar objects of sense. 



HUMAN THOUGHT, 231 

Take the bird : we know something of its shape, color, action, 
and music. We open its body, and find out something of the 
mystery wrapped up in it ; and yet in this bird there are won- 
ders of mechanism beyond the reach of the microscope. Such 
is the limitation of our minds that only a few of the most 
obvious properties in the outward world, a few only of the 
most sensible exhibitions of brute action, ever come under 
our inspection. Men have neither the time nor the capacity 
to know much of the world in which they live. Secrets 
innumerable in earth, air, and water, and of animate and 
inanimate creation, exist never to be disclosed to human 
thought. So far from the highest researches of science ex- 
hausting nature, they only open up regions inconceivably 
grander of wonder. 

Here, then, does the human mind show its limitation as 
extreme, not only in the world comprehended in self, but in 
all the objects of the external world. Nothing but the mere 
surface of things is ever known. What is known of any one 
thing is not the ten- thousandth part of that which is to be 
known. As when a child takes a watch and plays with the 
case and crystal, and admires the hands, and counts the little 
figures, from one to twelve, marked upon the dial-plate, and 
then thinks he knows all about the watch, so often does the 
vanity of the human mind fancy itself posted up in the 
knowledge of self or the world, when only there has been 
but the infant playing of the reason with a few of the outside 
properties of things. 

We come now to consider objects of thought inconceiva- 
bly grander than self, or the world, or the universe of worlds. 
We enter upon the contemplation of God; but how great is- 
the limitation of the mind here ! Evidently what we do 
know of God must be what he pleases to make known to us. 
As the distance between the creature and the Creator is infi- 
nite, so also the limitation of mind necessarily implied in the 
finite must be as great. God reveals himself to man as the 
First Cause, the Absolute, and the Infinite, but how can God, 
as such, be comprehended by the finite ? Certainly only in 
accordance with those modes of manifestation under which 



232 LIMITATIONS OF 

he chooses to reveal himself, l^ow, there are but two con- 
ceivable ways of the manifestatiou of God to man. Either 
man must ascend up to God, or God must condescend to 
man. Either the finite mind must rise up to the infinite and 
merge itself iuto the infinite, or the infinite must bring him- 
self, so far as he can be known, within the sphere of the finite, 
and come under human limitation so far as is consistent with 
his nature. !N"ow the finite cannot ascend up to the infinite, 
there can be no merging of the creature into the Creator. 

If man is so limited in thought respecting himself and the 
world, infinitely more limited is he in relation to God. If 
his knowledge of self and nature is so contracted, then what 
must not it be of the unlimited God ? There can be but one 
way in which God in any sense can be known to the reason 
of man: that way must be the descent of God to man, com- 
ing to man as far as suitable under human limitations within 
the sphere of human thought, and accommodated to the in- 
fant capacities of his creatures. This is the development of 
God in revelation; but what does this lead to? Is it not 
that the first study of man should be what is the actual con- 
dition of the human mind as related to the great facts made 
known in nature and in revelation ? The first study of the 
astronomer, before he reasons upon the stars, is the character 
of the instrument he is to make use of for the purpose of 
observation ; he can know only that which comes within the 
range of the telescope. Should the finite then presume to 
reason upon the infinite without first deciding upon its own 
essential limitation of thought ? Is it not the wildest dream 
of human pride to think of merging self into the infinite, 
or ascending up into God ? Can a creature, unable even to 
tell what is comprehended in a second cause, be competent 
to conceive of the great First Cause? 

If self-existence, under its own limitations, is a mystery 
so profound, much more must be the existence of the Abso- 
lute, in itself infinitely independent of all creatures and all 
worlds. But if the only way in which God in any true sense 
can be known to the human mind, is by accommodating 
himself to the essential limitations of the mind, then the in- 



HUMAN THOVGHT. 233 

ference is unavoidable, that whenever the human reason at- 
tempts to go beyond its own true sphere of thought it will 
show its folly by its absurdity and contradiction. In other 
words, the true province of the reason in relation to God is 
&\m.^\y belief in great facts made known. The proper business 
of the reason is to ascertain what God has said respecting 
himself and man, what facts has he communicated to man, 
and what are the evidences of a divine revelation to the hu- 
man family. The reason is invited to make the most of all 
the truth made known in nature or the Bible respecting God. 
Whenever it attempts to erect itself into a self-constituted 
tribunal, and say what God should do or not do, what he 
should reveal or not reveal, what facts made known are con- 
sistent with his attributes and what are not, then does human 
reason transcend the boundary line of its limitation. What 
is the consequence ? Is it not contradiction in theory, and 
absurdity in practice ? 

Certainly, if God does make himself known to us in any 
way, he will not previously ask the advice of his creatures. 
God will show as much of himself, his character, and perfec- 
tions, as he chooses to do, and no more. But suppose in this 
world he permits the existence of sin, of disease, of death, 
and of innumerable evils affecting man in his physical and 
moral condition. Suppose directly or indirectly, as the con- 
sequence of sin, all nature suffers, and disorder and pain 
more or less abounds, what should be the natural inference? 
Is it not that all these evils, external and internal, have a 
natural tendency to bias the mind, and that, in addition to. 
the limitation of human thought, we must add also the 
friction of sin, and view man not only in the essential little- 
ness of his capacity, but even in the derangement of that 
capacity by physical and moral evil ? This being so, there 
is a great argument for caution and modesty in all reason- 
ings upon God, his attributes, and the relation he sustains to 
man. Every theory of the mind in moral reasoning that 
does not take into account the friction of sin will be essen- 
tially dejective. 

What is the actual condition of the mind in every effort 



234 LIMITATIONS OF 

of reason to understand God as be has revealed himself to 
man ? This is the first inquiry to make, for just as we have 
a false estimate of the human mind, must be the erroneous 
conception of God. Is it possible to think of God beyond 
the range of human thought ? If God in any sense is known, 
can he be known except as he passes within the sphere of 
human thought ? But suppose the individual consciousness 
and mind has altogether a false estimate of itself; suppose 
it vainly thinks its own vagaries realities, and confounds or 
overlooks the great distinctions of right and wrong, truth and 
error; suppose the mind grovels in sensuality, or is intoxi- 
cated with the dreams of pride, — must not all this be taken 
into account in its decisions respecting God? If the lens of 
a telescope is defaced, will it not affect all the observations 
of the astronomer? But when the calculations are found 
wrong, are the stars at fault, or the instrument used to 
observe them ? 

There is a twofold limitation of thought in all reasoning 
upon God — that which is the result of original contraction, and 
that vitiation of mind the natural consequence of sin. The 
difficulty lies not so much in the former as the latter. The 
finite is the essential condition of all creatures, and it has a 
scale of gradation from the archangel to the worm, from 
moral agents, responsible and free, to the minutest insect. 
But God makes himself known in a way corresponding to 
the nature he has given to his creatures. To a large part 
of his creation he does not choose to make himself known 
in any manner. God gives to brute animals just those kind 
of faculties that enable them to carry out the limited end of 
their existence. In their own sphere, so diverse, they live 
and die with a nature corresponding alone to the wants of 
their contracted existence. 

But whatever may be the limitations of human thought, 
they do not exclude conscience and responsibility in the hu- 
man family, since their existence is not only for time but 
eternity. And yet the saddest thing connected with man- 
kind is the vitiation of their nature by sin. God does in- 
deed condescend to man, and accommodates himself to his 



HVMAN THOUGHT. 235 

nature ; but man, by the abuse of his free agency, has made 
himself sinful, otherwise there would be no error respecting 
God as he reveals himself to human limitation. What 
could be made known would never be mistaken, but clearly 
believed in and acted upon ; while that which should tran- 
scend the range of that limitation would be simply let alone 
as wrong to intrude into. But the tendency of sin in the 
mind is to make it bold where it should be timid, and timid 
w^here it should be bold. It reverses all the natural order of 
things. Instead of contenting itself with that which itViiay 
know, it seeks to find out that which it cannot know. The 
world is teeming with great facts, and God, by the direct 
manifestation of his mind to man, is making known things 
of transcendent importance to understand; and yet the folly 
of the human mind in no respect is more manifest than in 
passing over the sensible, the near, and the everyday facts 
of existence, and rashly speculating upon the Divine Being, 
as if the finite, the fallible, the weak, and the sinful was able 
to grasp in thought the infinite, the absolute, the omnipres- 
ent and omnipotent First Cause. 

Thus, the curse of sin is seen either in man groveling in 
the mire of sensuality, and not caring to think of God at all, 
or it makes itself known in an insane pride that imagines it 
can raise itself to God. But God only reveals himself in a 
w^ay corresponding to the nature he gives to his creatures. 
What is more clear than, if this is so, that the essential lim- 
itation of the human mind would make it necessary to be- 
lieve much that could not be understood, and submit to much 
that must ever be unavoidable. For the very reason that 
the finite cannot comprehend the infinite, or that the absolute 
and self-existent could not be known by the limited mind of 
man; for the very reason that all creatures who are but 
second causes, are peculiarly dependent upon the First Cause, 
is it not certain that all the speculations of philosophy must 
be wrecked whenever they venture beyond the legitimate 
limits of human thought? 

But consider some of those characteristics of the human 
mind that give the note of warning whenever it attempts to 



236 LIMITATIONS OF 

transgress its prescribed limits. First, whatever the mind 
does know it knows almost exclusively in the way of simple 
facts. This is true of all the familiar objects of sense that 
daily come under the observation of man, and even this 
knowledge is confined alone to the surface of facts. Thus, 
the mind knows the existence of the ocean, its vastness, its 
color, its saltness, and motion ; and yet what mysteries un- 
known in the ocean ! Thus, the mind knows that there is 
such a thing as the human body ; to reason a man out of 
this 'belief is impossible. But what do we know of the bodies 
we every moment carry about with us, except a few of the 
most sensible properties of the human system ? So of the 
earth and air. Ages have passed over the human race, and 
slowly accessions of knowledge have been made respecting 
earth and air ; but what proportion does the known bear to 
the unknown ? So also of rain, snow, sky, lightning, and 
heat, there is vastly more to be known than is known. 

But if this is so of the most apparent things in nature, 
what must we not infer respecting the mind of man, and es- 
pecially God ! Is it not evident that God in his infinite per- 
fections can be known only as he reveals himself within the 
sphere of human thought? But what must be the inference 
respecting such knowledge? Is it not that it must not only 
be accommodated to our mental limitation, but that it will 
be given to us more for the regulation of our conduct in this 
world than to gratify the curiosity, more as a matter of be- 
lief than mere reason, more for good living than for specu- 
lation ? Remember that for practice a right belief subserves 
all the purpose, and far better than elaborate research of 
thought or profound reasoning. Belief is a short process, 
available at ever}- emergency of life ; but a man may die be- 
fore he gets through with his reasoning: nor can human 
action wait long upon the lagging and uncertain footsteps of 
speculation. All right conduct need ask for is a right belief. 
And yet an axiom of life, universally practiced about things 
of this world, is discarded where God is concerned. In no 
respect is the insanity of human pride more seen than in 
presuming to dictate to God how he should make himself 
known to the reason. 



HUMAN THOUGHT. 237 

But suppose he onh' discloses to man great facts in his 
government; suppose he chooses to present his truth to ns 
more in the way of assertion than argument, more under 
the aspect of simple declaration than by any attempt to 
gratify the reason; suppose God tells us what he is, rather 
than how he is ; suppose he consults no one method of human 
reason, either in the time, the way, or the character of his 
great remedy for the moral disease of man; suppose his 
revelation is exclusively confined to the specific end of secur- 
ing right conduct, — will the human mind dare assert that 
God should not do so? As the human race consists of men, 
women, and children, with only a brief span of life, and vast 
issues hanging upon the improvement of their time ; as all 
ought to believe right, does not the very course God takes to 
make himself known to man, show infinite wisdom as accom- 
modated not only to the limited sphere of human thought, 
but also the sinfulness existing in that sphere ? There is no 
difiiculty in revelation that does not find its counterpart in 
nature. There are no peculiar obscurities in the facts of the 
Bible that are not equally evident in the facts of the physical 
world. JSTothing lies so far beyond the range of human 
thought as the great law of cause and ettect. The process of 
all right reason is from the known to the unknown, from the 
evidence of the seen and the felt to the belief of that unseen, 
and, as yet, unfelt. But it is reversing all right reason to go 
out of the sphere of human thought to explain that within its 
sphere. The human mind, with a capacity extremely limited, 
must content itself with simple facts and great axioms of 
moral truth declared by God. Nothing is so fatal to all true 
belief, even as all right reason, as to pretend to decide upon 
that which it cannot know, or to reject that which bears the 
stamp of the inspiration of God. Thus, take the divine pur- 
poses and the free agency of man, viewed alone as great facts 
made known in nature and revelation, and no difficulty need 
present itself in relation to these facts more perplexing than 
in other facts. But suppose the philosopher attempts to 
reason them out, and show how they both harmonize with 
each other: what is the result? In the very process of 



238 LIMITATIONS OF 

human reason there is a limit passed, where, to proceed one 
step farther, is plainly impossible. The dillicQlty lies not so 
much in the separate facts as in the attempt to blend them 
together. 

But why, at a certain point, must all reasoning stop, 
or involve itself in absurdity and contradiction ? Why 
does the imperative mandate of the individual consciousness 
say, Thus far shalt thou go, and no farther ? Evidently be- 
cause the finite cannot comprehend the infinite; because 
there is an essential limitation of thought, beyond which all 
thought falters. Suppose there may be an apparent contra- 
diction in the efi:brt to blend together God's purposes and 
free moral agency : are either of these great facts to be de- 
nied? The contradiction that appears to the mind arises 
alone from its limitation. What appears to infringe upon 
these facts only confirms them. For why this failure of the 
mind to show how both, by God, are made to coalesce to- 
gether, while the action of each is separate and independ- 
ent? Why are we compelled to admit the facts, and yet 
find the reason unable to reconcile them in their joint ex- 
istence ? Is it that God has given to us a reason only 
to confound it ? Is it that there is any real contradiction 
in the action of the divhie purposes and free moral 
agency ? Is one naturally opposed to the other ? ^ot in the 
least! there is no real antagonism in the blending together 
of the two. They act in perfect harmony with each other; 
both are essential, both true, and while there is a dependence 
of one upon the other, it is not a dependence that in the 
least infringes upon the sphere of either. Why, then, the 
more we reason upon the mode of the joint existence of 
both, is there an apparent contradiction, so that the full ad- 
mission of one seems to preclude the existence of the other ? 
All this arises from the inherent limitation of the mind, and 
the impossibility beyond a certain line of having the least idea 
or knowledge of the infinite God, When the bird flies too 
high in the air, its motion becomes weak and unsteady, and 
it must soon descend to a region adapted to its nature. So 
of the reason : when it attempts to fly too high into the 



HUMAN THOUGHT. 239 

mystery of the divine action and being, its very weakness 
shows itself in absurdity and contradiction. 

As facts made known, man's free moral agency and God's 
purposes are most evident; but they are evident as facts to be 
credited and acted upon, not as theories to be reasoned out 
and demonstrated. Where is it that the difficulty shows 
itself when the mind of man attempts by any process of rea- 
son to blend together in one harmonious theory the union of 
God's purposes and man's free moral agency? Precisely 
where the finite passes the line of its limitation and intrudes 
into the infinite. It is evident there is the finite, and equally 
evident there is the infinite ; but who can explain their joint 
existence or reconcile it to the reason ? Denying the finite, 
we merge into pantheism ; denying the infinite, we plunge 
into atheism; and either error destroys free moral agency. 
Suppose we admit the finite and the infinite, but deny the 
divine purposes : what kind of God do we make that has a 
mind without a purpose, an intelligence without a will, 
thought without intention, existence without wish, and per- 
ception without choice ? If a man cannot be deprived of 
purpose and yet be a man, could God lose his purposes and 
yet be God ? 

But, says an objector, I cannot reconcile the joint action of 
man's free agency with God's purposes. The existence of 
one seems to conflict with that of the other. But is it not 
evident that what we are unable to comprehend should seem 
contradictory ? Is there greater difficulty of comprehension 
in this than in the joint action of thought and matter, spirit 
and body ? But the joint existence of thought and matter, 
spirit and body, cannot be denied because of their apparent 
contradiction. ISTeither free agency nor the divine purposes 
can be invalidated because of the seeming inconsistency of 
their joint existence. Apparent contradictions are not real 
ones. The Infinite can only be known as he condescends to 
the limitation of human thought. 

The whole doctrine of the incarnation of Christ is emi- 
nently consistent with this view. The incarnation is revealed 
as a simple fact to be believed, not a speculation to be rea- 



240 LIMITATIONS OF 

soned upon. What has reason to do with that which, like 
the infinite, is impossible to be conceived of? Says an ob- 
jector. The incarnation is incomprehensible, and therefore 
impossible. Yes ! the incarnation is impossible to be con- 
ceived of by men, because it is as high above man as the 
infinite is above the finite; but is it therefore impossible to 
God ? Cannot God bring this about, even if the compre- 
hension of this truth is impossible to man ? The incarnation 
of Christ, the Son of God, is the manifestation of the wisdom 
of God to man in its highest and noblest aspect. 

It is this great doctrine that tells us in the clearest manner 
that when God makes himself known to man, when espe- 
cially he has some great purpose of mercy in view, he does it 
in that way which corresponds with the nature of man and 
his wants. It is the descent of God, so far as is suitable, 
into the sphere of man and into the region of his limitation; 
and, therefore, it is the assumption of that very limitation 
necessary for the welfare of the human race. But are any to 
imagine that God is finite or limited, because he takes upon 
himself those limitations absolutely necessary for accommo- 
dating himself to the contracted sphere of human compre- 
hension and human action? Will any take advantage of 
this to attribute iniirmity to God, because he condescends to 
the infirmity of man ? When Christ said, " He that hath seen 
me hath seen the Father," is it not obvious that Christ speaks 
only under the restriction of human limitation ? Is not the 
same great truth announced in other words, when Christ 
declares to Thomas, " If ye had known me, ye should have 
known my Father also" ? This is all consistent with those 
other assertions in the Bible, where God speaks of himself 
as impossible to be seen, as the infinitely unknown. In the 
one case, God speaks of himself as beyond the sphere of 
human thought; in the other case, as condescending to come 
within the range of the limitation of man. The great truth 
of the incarnation of Christ, is God revealing himself under 
human limitations, the infinite entering the sphere of the 
finite ; but this very condescension adds inconceivably to the 
glory of God, rather it is that glory, unlimited and eternal. 



HUMAN THOUGHT. 241 

coming under the restrictions essential in the finite, not 
diminished, but, under the loveliest aspect of mercy, conform- 
ing to that limitation inherent in the contracted sphere of 
human thought and action. Yet this very condescension of 
God is made the occasion of innumerable objections to the 
plain facts of the Bible. But has it come to this, that either 
God in no sense shall be known, or, if known as far as hu- 
man limitation will permit, this very knowledge is to be 
made the excuse for denying his infinite perfections and pur- 
poses of wisdom and grace, or man's free moral agency? 

In no sense is the limitation of the human mind more seen 
than in the errors fallen into in the theories advocated of the 
first cause and second causes, existence uncreated and exist- 
ence created, the duration of mind and matter, time and eter- 
nity. Yet it is certain that God existed from eternity, and as 
certain that matter and mind created is finite. But either 
matter and mind are derived from God, or they are not. If 
we say they are parts of God, originating from his substance, 
then we fall into pantheism, and pantheism is fatal to all hu- 
man responsibility. If we say the finite does not originate 
from the infinite, then something comes from nothing, that 
which is proceeds from that which is not. Here creation, 
which is exclusively the work of God, plunges the reason into 
difficulties from which faith only can extricate the mind. If 
God is the Absolute, the First Cause, the Infinite, then in 
any way to make the finite, the derived, or any begun exist- 
ence of mind or matter originating from God, does conflict 
with the fact of creation in the production of something from 
nothing. Creation is as much beyond the reason of man as 
the existence of the infinite. Man» must believe it as a fact 
without explanation, or in the very efifort to explain it the 
mind rushes into pantheism or atheism. Say that the world 
is a part of God, derived from him; say that the human 
mind is an emanation of the divine mind, and pantheism, with 
its denial of second causes and responsibility, follows; say 
that the universe is God, in the sense that nothing exists but 
this, and atheism is the result, and with it, as with pantheism, 
there is the denial of free agency and human responsibility. 

16 



242 LIMITATIONS OF 

Thus, many a noble mind has been wrecked in fruitless 
speculations to solve the difficulties involved in the existence 
of the absolute and the created, the underived and the finite, 
the self-existent and existence begun ; but, other than as 
facts made known, there can be no knowledge of these 
things. To know the great things involved in the existence 
of God and in creation, the finite capacity of man must en- 
large itself to an infinite capacity, or man must become God. 
But what absurdity in the idea ! Yet this very contradiction 
of mind, — arising from abortive attempts to convert nature 
into God, or God into nature ; to construct a theory that shall 
tell how mind or matter exists ; how the infinite exists without 
the finite, or the finite without the infinite ; how creation is 
possible or impossible ; how the derived comes from the un- 
derived, or how only one exists, — this confounding second 
causes with the First Cause, all show that some fatal per- 
versity of unbelief has taken hold of the mind. 

In all reasoning from the personality of man to the per- 
sonality of God, the limitation of the human mind is pecu- 
liarly seen. From finite personality we ascend to the idea 
of infinite personality. But the personality of man involves 
not only individuality, a person distinct from all other per- 
sons, but a local habitation for the soul, a sphere of existence 
restricted and an essential limitation in the mode of human 
life. Finite personality has a finite sphere of existence and 
development; in that sphere it is self-conscious ; in its rela- 
tions to the world it is altogether dependent ; its very life 
and happiness must flow from its connection with that which 
is out of it and above it. But the personality of God is in- 
finite, unlimited, self-existent, and independent; its action 
and happiness are in itself; perfect independence and absolute 
freedom are its peculiar character. The personality of God 
makes him in every respect essentially^ distinct from the uni- 
verse. This personality of God, with his infinite attributes 
of wisdom, power, goodness, and knowledge, is underived, 
and therefore is the peculiar feature of the Absolute and the 
First Cause. Because from the known we infer the unknown, 
or because we believe from our own conscious personality in 



HUMAN THOUGHT. 943 

the personality of God, is it not the extreme of folly to 
assert that God's personality in all respects resembles our 
own ? Yet this s^reat mistake is the source of all the contro- 
versy that arises in disputing the revealed fact of the triune 
existence of God, comprehending his essential unity of being 
with three persons, — the Father, the Son, and the Holy 
Spirit. 

But evidently what constitutes tlie whole of the personality 
of God is not within the sphere of the human mind to com- 
prehend ; if, as a fact, it is made known that God is one being 
and yet three persons, that fact is to be believed in from the 
testimony of the sacred Scriptures. But, says an objector, 
the word person, when used in relation to man, always means 
one distinct being, and therefore three persons in the God- 
head must mean three distinct beings. This does not follow. 
If the objector could comprehend the infinite, he might then 
be competent to say whether there is a real contradiction in 
the doctrine of Trinitarians; he might then be prepared to 
question the consistency of this threefold personality with 
the unity of the Godhead. But as the objector is finite in 
mind and existence, how can he insist upon his own theory 
as true if it conflicts with the plain assertions of the Bible? 
Does the same thing of necessity follow in the infinite being 
of God that does follow in the limited existence of man ? 
Suppose one person means in a finite sphere one being, and 
three persons three beings, must the same logic be applied 
to the infinite God? Until the mode of the divine existence 
is known in its height and length and breadth and depth, 
is it not presumption to assert that what happens to be true 
in a finite relation is alone true in the infinite, the absolute, 
and the First Cause ? Is the limited capacity of man com- 
petent to bring the charge of tritheism against those who 
hold to the doctrine that there is but one God and yet three 
persons in the Godhead ? What if, in reasoning from human 
personality to the divine personality, there is an apparent 
contradiction ? Does not this follow from the essential 
limitation of the human faculties? 

The whole subject is one altogether beyond the grasp of 



24-i LIMITATIONS OF 

the comprehension of man, and it is to be credited as a fact 
revealed, with no attempt to explain it. For, until all that 
enters into divine personality is comprehended, there is an 
obvious impossibility in asserting that the threefold person- 
ality of God is inconsistent with his divine unity. Tritheism 
does not follow because the doctrine is held of three persons 
in the Godhead, and it does not follow simply because a pro- 
cess of reasoning that would be correct in relation to man in 
his linite capacity is not of necessity so when applied to the 
infinite, the absolute, and the First Cause. In the nature of 
things, the union of the human and the divine natures, and 
the doctrine of three persons in one God, must, to be con- 
ceived of in any sense, come under the limitations of human 
thought; but we are not to attach our own limitations to God, 
because in the way of accommodation to the infirmities of 
our faculties God reveals himself. If to be known at all, 
God must be know^n within the sphere of the finite; then let 
us be thankful for such knowledge, let us humbly submit 
our reason and hearts to it, and not pervert the divine conde- 
scension into an arrogant denial of revealed facts. These 
facts are not changed by any imperfection in our own minds, 
nor do they infringe upon the infinite perfection of God, but 
they are given to us for right conduct, for more than curious 
speculation, — for the trial of faitK rather than reason. 

There are many difficulties that are presented in the con- 
sideration of facts made known respecting the divine govern- 
ment, probation, heaven and hell; but these difficulties also 
grow from the limitations of human thought, they are shown 
as much in contemplating that which God declares he vnll do 
as in that which pertains to the mode of his existence. Con- 
sider how we come into this w^orld, and what we are while 
we live in it. How does the mind develop itself from infancy ? 
Is not its growth slow, vitiated, and, through w^rong habit or 
association, subject to great perversion? Here then is the 
finite, emerging under the thousand perverting influences of 
sin, contemplating God as made known. 

But is not the inference correct that God can only be most 
inadequately apprehended, either in his character or in his 



HUM AX THOUGHT. 245 

governmeDt ? Is it not certain that many difficulties will 
present themselves from the position of man in his relation 
to God ? Does it therefore follow that facts made known re- 
specting what God does or will do, are inconsistent or contra- 
dictory because they may appear so under the perverting in- 
fluences of sin ? Is it not certain that the limitations of 
human thought will experience also a kind of deception that 
arises from a person ignorant of those limits beyond which 
the mind cannot go ? Facts are stubborn things that do not 
bend to our theories. We may think them very contradic- 
tory : we may say that if one kind of facts is true, another is 
not true; we may say we cannot reconcile this fact with a 
different fact made known, — but all will be of no use. It is 
quite probable that as much contradiction will arise in the 
mind respecting what God says he icill do as in relation to 
what God says he is. It is quite probable that the human 
mind in its limitations will be often severely perplexed in all 
reasoning about the facts of the divine government and the 
issues of this short probation. There is a cause for this in 
that finite capacity that cannot take in all the reasons for 
God's conduct. 

God must in himself have many reasons for what he does 
that he will not see fit to communicate, — reasons that exoner- 
ate him from the charge of partiality or injustice, and which 
are concealed in his own infinite being. But more than this, 
it is certain that God may have reasons for what he does that 
could not be comprehended if made known, — reasons that lie 
altogether beyond the finite capacit}', and that are a rule to 
him, while they may be no rule to us. The natural presump- 
tion respecting a revelation of God's will to man is, that it 
will be regulative rather than speculative ; more to secure 
right action than to favor the reason. While God will not 
treat the reason w^ith contempt, he certainly will teach it its 
true place before him, — he will encourage its development 
but not its presumption. 

Thus we find it. The whole import of the gospel to man 
is to teach man how to live well and how to be saved, but 
beyond this very little is said for the mere gratification of the 



246 LIMITATIONS OF HUMAN THOUGHT. 

mind. Yet objections in relation to God's government, and 
especially the punishment denounced against the wicked, have 
often been made. Either the truth of God's threatenings 
against sin has been denied, or the mind has rebelled against 
God as acting unworthy of himself. ]^ow it is obviously im- 
possible for a linite capacity to say what God should do in 
the punishment of ski. The mind cannot, from any theory 
of God, decide as to the character of his government or deal- 
ings toward his creatures. True, we can say God will do 
nothing unjust, unworthy of himself, or opposed to the great 
law of eq[uity ; but this is the very difficulty to encounter, to 
decide what in all cases is just, equitable, or worthy of God. 
Such a question, in its full import, can be decided only by 
God himself. 

It cannot come under the limited capacity of man to say 
under all circumstances what God should do. Why so ? Be- 
cause, first, man does not know what all circumstances are, 
and then man does not know all that God is. Here are two 
mighty objections to any theory of the human mind respect- 
ing what should be, in all cases, the mode of the divine con- 
duct ^respecting his creatures. Man neither knows all that 
God is, nor all the circumstances that are connected with his 
conduct. Before, then, the mind presumes to dispute any re- 
vealed fact, let it ask itself how far it is competent to sit in 
judgment upon that fact. Is it not obvious that if the in- 
strument of thought is distorted we shall have an erroneous 
impression of the object of thought? Is it not certain that 
if the mind is perverted it will pervert that which it professes 
to contemplate ? Should not man, finite in all his faculties 
and weak in all his powers, remember that here it sees in part 
and knows in part; here the known bears no comparison to 
the unknown ; here life is too short for idle dreams or useless 
speculations ; here probation, with its issues for eternity, ad- 
monishes all to seek first the kingdom of God and the 
friendship of the Almighty, so that, in another and better 
world, we ma}^ see as we are seen, and know as we are 
known ? 



CHAPTER XXIY. 



ATHEISM. 

*' The living Grod, which made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things 
that are therein." — Acts, xiv. 15. 

<< The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." — Psalm liii. 1. 



Consider the coiulition of the atheist upon the supposition 
that there is no God. 

His condition upon the supposition that there is a God. 

If atheism is true, then the wliole system of natural and re- 
vealed theology is false, — both are founded upon the ad- 
mission that there is a God. If there is no God, then nature 
is its own God. Chance is the deity that rules, or the law 
unintelligent of an irreversible fatalit}', or some unknown 
power self- existent, pervading all substances, blindly de- 
pendent upon nature, or itself apart of nature. The intinite 
diversities of mind and matter have then no other origin than 
chance, or some cause unknown and without intelligence, or 
they had an existence uncaused and from eternity. There is, 
then, no independent and Almighty Creator, self-existent 
and uncaused, unlimited in his agency and knowledge, and 
infinite in goodness, wisdom, and justice. 

What does atheism gain by this ? The atheist is no better 
off, in any respect, than those who believe in a God. By re- 
moving the highest incentive to virtue and the greatest re- 
straint upon sin, the atheist gains nothing either in virtue or 
happiness. By holding to no higher tribunal for his conduct 
than a human one, he makes not himself more useful or 
happy, he adds nothing to his real pleasures or virtues. How 
is the atheist better off in this world than the believer in a 
God of infinite purity, justice, and benevolence? Suppose 
him to find out the fact of his inability to take care of him- 

(247) 



248 ATHEISM. 

self, or others to take care of him ; suppose him conscious 
that no human aid can soothe his pain, or relieve the suf- 
ferings of the present hour, or the misery that threatens him 
in the future, — is he better off than those who believe in a 
Being so wise and merciful that he can do that for them 
that no human agency can perform ? 

But the atheist is no better than the believer in a God in his 
relations to society and in the happiness enjoyed from the con- 
templation of the works of nature. Atheism does not help its 
advocates to more usefulness or more peace of mind in the 
family relation : it is a poor preparation for society. Certainly 
civil and parental government must lose one main prop to 
respect and efficiency with the fear of God removed, and the 
sanctions of a higher than human authority done away with. 
The atheist walks upon the earth, and yet believes in no 
Creator of it ; he breathes the air, and confesses no Being 
who mingles in such nice proportions those ethereal elements 
that separated or united together in a different way would 
destroy all animal life ; he beholds the sun, and wonders at 
the mysterious light that, coming from the distant orb, gives 
beauty and growth to all vegetation, and yet that sun has no 
intelligent author ; he admires the ocean with its ever-mov- 
ing waters, and yet believes in no infinite mind that combines 
the waters together and makes them fit for countless inhab- 
itants; he looks with awe upon the mountain, raising its 
majestic head above the clouds, but whether there is a maker 
of that mountain does not convince his mind ; he studies the 
anatomy of the human frame, but the skill that forms the eye, 
or constructs the bones, or sends the blood through the veins, 
has its cause in no God. 

The condition of the atheist, so far as the works of nature 
are concerned, is far inferior in happiness to the believer in a 
God. If atheism is true, — yet it bears upon its face everything 
repulsive and gloomy, — if, in looking upon some masterpiece 
of human mechanism, it is a pleasure to us to know some 
intelligent cause, and recognize some mind that adjusted to- 
gether the varied parts, is there no pleasure in looking upon 
the universe and surveying the miracles of a divine workman- 



ATHEISM. 249 

ship ? When the atheist contemplates those worlds whose 
rapid flight through space no finite mind can comprehend, 
the endless diversities of bodies, each acting in accordance 
with their respective laws, he sees no God in their formation. 
Admitting that he is right, was there ever a truth more 
repulsive or destitute of pleasure ? 

The atheist is worse off than the believer in a God, from 
the fact that his highest rule of conduct must be human au- 
thority, or what appears to him his own interests. But 
human authority ma}' be upon the side of vice, and the 
atheist's self-interests may be the worst selfishness. If im- 
punity to sin can be secured with no earthly punishment, 
why be intimidated from transgression, since no punishment 
can be experienced from a higher tribunal? If vice is more 
profitable than virtue, why not be vicious, since there is no 
God to punish ? If it is more pleasant to act as we please, 
however pernicious to the welfare of others, why not do so, 
if human justice can be averted and divine justice not expe- 
rienced ? If wealth, honor, or pleasure can be secured by 
oppression or fraud, why not use these means to secure the 
heart's desire, if there is no God to judge or condemn ? 

Consider, also, that atheism, true or false, is revolting to 
the conscience and those sensibilities of our nature not wholly 
dead to all noble activity. If man has a lower nature that, 
with passionate inclinations, leads him to sin, he yet has con- 
science and reason, and the faculty of judgment, and natural 
perceptions of what is true and honorable and fitting to 
moral excellence. The idea of no God is opposed to the 
voice of conscience, that speaks of an authority higher for hu- 
man conduct than the laws alone of man. The atheist, by 
suppressing the instinctive convictions of • conscience and 
reason, is in no way to advance his internal peace or pure 
gratification. The atheist, by waging war with the better 
part of his nature, only helps on the worse, — he not only 
applies a burning torch to the magazine of his evil passions, 
but removes away the natural reservoir of waters that God, 
in mercy, has given to quench the flames of base desires. 
Such is our nature, and such is the existing relation of things, 



250 ATHEISM. 

that virtue and happiness are both sacrificed by rebelling 
against the conscience and permitting the lower part of our 
nature to lord it over the higher. But our noblest impulses 
are all favorable to the admission of a God, and our account- 
ability to a source immeasurably superior to any human au- 
thority. Atheism, so far as it dares, throws the whole 
weight of its influence to help on the inferior part of our na- 
ture. By waging war with our best impulses, and not heed- 
ing the voice of conscience when it speaks of accountability 
to a divine being, it weakens beyond description the moral 
power to be virtuous. An atheistical heart is the hot-bed of 
all vice. Human law can only suppress the outward devel- 
opments of those sins more immediately dangerous to society. 
What, then, is the mischief engendered in the community 
when no fear of God exists to stop the deep under-curreuts 
of sin ? 

But consider atheism in its relation to the future. Either all 
the enjoyments of the atheist are with the body, to be buried 
in the grave, or, if there is a future life in reserve for him, he 
has no reason to believe it will be any better or so good as 
the present life. He takes, as a celebrated infidel once ex- 
pressed, a leap in the dark ; and how does he know but that he 
may be as likely to jump into misery as into nothingness? 
What argument can he offer to show that, if eternal oblivion 
is not his portion after death, it may not be an existence 
combining worse elements of wretchedness than the present ? 
If the atheist instinctively shrinks from the death of the 
brute, and, like Milton's fallen angels, would desire an exist- 
ence even of pain to eternal nothingness, wdiat kind of exist- 
ence in the future has he to offer? With the denial of the 
first truth of natural and revealed theology, what are the 
hopes of the atheist after death ? Shutting out from his 
mind Christ, the great medium of redemption, and absolving 
himself from the sacred restraints of Christianity^ the atheist 
adds to the hopelessness of his state by extinguishing even 
the torch of nature. Thus, atheism, if true, is so gloomy and 
repulsive that its admission involves in a worse than Egyp- 
tian darkness the world. If atheism derides the restraints of 



ATHEISM, 251 

religion, it has none of its elevating tendencies or hopes. 
Atheism avoids the future, for the future is cheerless and un- 
certain. Beyond this world all is doubt. The present life 
is, then, the only sphere of action that the atheist loves to 
contemplate. Man's vision is contracted to the few short 
years of his mortal existence. But does the atheist imagine 
that, by shutting out from the mind every beam of immor- 
tality, he makes happier or better this world ? Does he dream 
that, when he has enthroned in the heart the poor idols of 
time, he has retrieved the losses of eternity? If the atheist 
has made out religion a fiction, and a personal God a delu- 
sion, has he conferred any real favor upon man ? Is it not 
true, the more contracted our hopes the less noble our con- 
duct ? Does the atheist imagine the good have any thanks 
for a system that makes the present hour alone valuable and 
extinguishes the bright hopes of the future ? 

But consider the condition of the atheist upon the sup- 
position that there is a God. If atheism is untrue^ then what 
follows ? The existence of God reveals the great fact of his 
government, natural and moral. To learn what the govern- 
ment of God is, we have two books to consult, — nature and 
revehition. The first lesson we learn, as moral beings, is 
that the present life is one of trial under the government of 
God. Here upon this earth are we placed, with duties to per- 
form and sins to resist. Here are we tempted, and yet not 
compelled into sin ; allured to virtue, but not forced into it. 
There are certain actions that human and divine law combine 
to deter us from committing, while there are other deeds the 
performance of which secures the approval of the divine law 
and our conscience. Against the more atrocious develop- 
ments of sin the laws of God and man are arrayed, while 
with every impure desire or wrong purpose there is made 
known the opposition of the will of God. Those sins that 
cannot be reached by human government are all condemned 
by divine law. Thus, even the atheist finds in his own ex- 
perience that the sanctions of human and divine law are' 
upon him. 

In this world for some sins the divine government pecu- 



252 ATHEISM. 

liarly manifests its indignation. In the very constitution of 
man God writes the impress of his authority. Let a person 
give himself up to strong drink, or the control of impure 
passion, and even upon the body are inscribed the characters 
of divine indignation. Let a person habitually foster in him- 
self anger, or malice, or envy, or fraud, and it will not be 
long before even the body will reveal the injury done to the 
soul. Here, then, we see sensuality and intemperance writing 
in lineaments of wrath their impress upon the form of man. 
Here we see the baser passions of our nature inscribing their 
fatal mark upon the soul and body of man. 

Why, then, is the whole course of nature so hostile to sin 
and so friendly to virtue ? AVhy does our constitution thus 
reveal the misery of sin ? With the evidence of God, is 
there not made known his moral government? Consider 
that the government of God is uniformly upon the side of 
virtue : it is based upon those principles that, acted out, 
secure the highest welfare of every person. Thus, the laws 
of God disapprove of all sin and approve of all virtue, — they 
demand the performance of those duties that involve in them 
the noblest blessings. If justice is an essential feature of 
God's government, so is benevolence. Who but God insti- 
tuted that system of things by w^hich one kind of action pro- 
motes our welfare while another results in our wretchedness? 
Here, then, we see the truth revealed of a probationary state, 
and that the divine purposes are tending to some higher con- 
summation, where there is to be the revelation more perfectly 
of God's dealings with mankind. 

Another feature of God's government is, that it holds all 
mankind accountable for their conduct. Law implies subjects. 
All being under the government of God are bound to obey 
his will. 

Revelation makes known the great fact that the govern- 
ment of God over man includes not only the present life, but 
also the future, — that this world is only a rude stage of exist- 
ence, where are cultivated those plants that must have another 
sphere of being to reach their maturity of sin or virtue. The 
existence of God, with the clear intimations of his will in na- 



ATHEISM. 253 

ture and revelation, show ns a boundless future beyond the 
grave, an illimitable expanse of time, where thought, feel- 
ing, and perception continue, — where the soul will look back 
upon the associations and scenes of time, even as the mariner 
upon the ocean observes upon the far-distant sea the dim 
outlines of the land no longer to be visited as his home or 
the nursery of his infant years. Thus, God's government 
in relation to man has in it progressive stages of develop- 
ment, so that what now is dark will in the future become 
clear, and what now is unknown will by creatures be under- 
stood, so that the apparent irregularities with the evils sin 
has introduced into the world will hereafter iind an explana- 
tion such as shall remove all doubt of the goodness of 
God. 

Another indication of the moral government of God is, 
that there actually does exist in harmony with that govern- 
ment a system of redemption by, Christ. AYe live under the 
strange anomaly of grace and law, of a system comprehend- 
ing the most perfect justice and at the same time the most 
unlimited mercy, — a system where divine law for a short 
time stands in abeyance, while infinite love, through the 
mediation of Christ, works its miracles of salvation for re- 
deemed sinners. To deny the fact of God's existence, and con- 
sequently his government, under a system of law, would be far 
more excusable than to deny them under a system of grace. 
If atheism under the former would reveal neither reason nor 
wisdom, what shall be said of atheism under the latter? The 
real sin lies not so much in the mind that pretends to believe 
there is no good evidence of God's existence, as in the heart 
that wishes it to be so. It is an indication not so much of 
want of intellect as want of all good sensibility to the grand- 
est of truths and the best of beings. How slender is the 
argument necessary to induce a man to embark his fortune 
in an enterprise where nothing can be lost by the venture, but 
everything ma}^ be gained ! But the atheist reverses this rule 
of wisdom : he ventures his all where nothing is gained if 
there is no God, and everything is lost if there is. The atheist 
increases his condemnation by presuming upon such a course 



254 ATHEISM. 

under an economy of grace. While atheistical in heart, grace 
can be no grace to him, — the golden hours of probation in re- 
spect to salvation are nothing to him, — angels of love inviting 
to a fairer world can be no angels to him, — ministers of afiec- 
tion standing bj his sleeping couch, or present in the sweet 
retirement of home, can avail nothing for him ; with the 
denial of God he cuts himself aloof from all those influences 
that would otherwise lead him to heaven. When he looks 
upon nature, with her endless diversities of form, he looks 
upon a blank, a causeless something with no intelligent au- 
thor ; when he surveys the heavens, he recognizes only an 
unmeaning law, or a blind chance; all creation is open for 
inspection, but its great Author is denied. The Being who 
paints the flower of the field or the rainbow that arches the 
sky, or gives music to the bird that warbles, or strength and 
intelligence to man, is forgotten. 

To see more clearly the real nature of atheism, let us con- 
trast it in its influence with Christianity. It is not our object 
to speak of the truth of Christianity, or discuss the evidences 
of its divine origin. We only purpose to portray it in its 
influence upon mankind. Atheism comes professedly to de- 
liver the mind from the shackles of Christianity. To believe 
in the God of revelation would be to deny itself. To admit 
a God would be to admit the duties we owe to him, and all 
the sanctions of his moral government; but if there is no 
God, then Christianity is a fable, and the sanctions of religion 
are unfounded. In what respect, then, is atheism better than 
Christianity ? Here are the ills of life, with their inevitable 
attendants. Here come death and sickness, and poverty 
and hunger and want, all the wretchedness of crime and the 
pains of dissipation and folly: these things do exist in the 
world. Two diflTerent schemes are presented to remedy the 
evils of the present life — atheism and Christianity ; each as 
diverse as light and darkness. In what respect does atheism 
remedy the ills of life, or give the assurance of a better state 
beyond the grave ? ITo rule of judgment more correct than 
that based upon the influence exerted. Atheism says there 
is no God, consequently there is no Saviour for sinners, no 



ATHEISM. 255 

immortality of blessedness as made known is revelation for 
the believing in Christ ; atheism at the best can offer nothing 
beyond the grave but a condition like that of the present life, 
and that even it cannot make certain by a single argument. 
It must of necessity, therefore, limit its promises and hopes 
to the present world. What does it offer ? By removing all 
the restraints of the future it shuts up the mind onlj^ to the 
enjoyments of the present hour. What does it offer for that 
hour ? What the paradise it makes out of this life ? 

Atheism has indeed its conventional rules, but all those 
rules it discards when opportunity gives impunity and license 
gratification. It forms for itself a code of laws, and the chief 
one upon the list is, your own pleasure is your highest law, 
and your only restraint should be the impossibility of gratifi- 
cation. Thus it embodies in itself, as its essential element, 
that which discards all moral obligation, or any rule of duty 
that depends upon the w^ill of God and the best welfare of 
mankind. Examine, then, atheism in its influence upon the 
individual and upon society. One of the first things we 
learn in coming into the world is, that our own pleasure, to 
be innocent, must not be at the expense of the pleasure of 
others, and our ow^n gratification, to be right, must never in- 
fringe upon the best interests of society. Christianity makes 
around each individual a circle, and says, beyond that circle 
you must not go, or you trespass upon the rights of your 
neighbor. To go without your circle is to exclude yourself 
from all the real pleasures of your circle, as well as do injury 
to others. Thus the chief element of Christianity is that of 
good restraint, because by it the individual and the commu- 
nity move in harmony, and by respecting the rights of each 
the interests of the whole are mutually promoted. What 
does atheism do ? It breaks down that wall of self-protection 
that binds all society together with the cord of friendship 
and of love. By giving a license to the passions and appe- 
tites of our nature that Christianity condemns, by absolving 
the individual from holy restraints that the gospel approves 
of, it turns the individual loose upon the community, to be to 
society, wherever his own selfish interests may lead, its greatest 



256 ATREIS3L 

enemy. How then does atheism benefit the world? As far 
as it can go or it dares to go, it mocks at the wholesome 
restraints of religion, and makes no higher law to the indi- 
vidual than his private inclination. What of the sweets of 
life does it offer to society more than the religion of Christ? 
It is the glory of atheism to absolve the individual and society 
from those restraints that religion most earnestly seeks to im- 
pose. Its creed consists in no religion. Christ and God are 
names that atheism would obliterate from the memory of all, 
or only rehearse them to show its triumph over religion. 
After throwing the Bible into the fire, and stifling with its 
profane scoffs every aspiration of holiness, — after it makes 
itself an undisputed master of the cottage and the palace, and 
is the public guest of the nation and the idol of its warmest 
love, what are the rewards it bestows, what the substitute it 
offers for the hopes of the gospel ? 

When atheism had one triumph in France, what did it do? 
It secured the national divorcement of the people from the 
restraints of the Bible. It placed upon the throne the God- 
dess of Reason, and made all Paris ring with its hymn of tri- 
umph over the death of Christianity. But anarchy and ruin 
followed in the rear of its track, — the guillotine drank up 
the best blood of the nation, — personal property and life 
every day were endangered, and the sword of atheism, in a few 
short years, devoured three millions of the people. Equality, 
fraternity, and liberty were the only trinity adored ; but no 
heathen temple could reveal three gods more vile or more 
cruel. The equality of atheism aimed to obliterate the just 
distinctions of society that alone preserved it from stagna- 
tion, — its fraternity attempted to bind, by the coercion of 
physical force, those diverse orders of mankind in unison 
whose hearts alone could be reached by moral renovation, — 
its liberty was but another name for passion uncontrolled by 
those good influences that give to freedom its only value. 
Thus did atheism show itself when it had a fair opportunity; 
and who would wish to see repeated like scenes of its vic- 
tory ? 

But atheism, in doing away with the laws of God, tends di- 



ATHEISM. 257 

rectlj to do away with parental and civil law; its code of mo- 
rality is so corrupt that it does not oiFer to society a single 
support. By removing the highest restraint upon vice it 
suffers it to roam at large, until it becomes so formidable that 
it even welcomes as a self-protection the greatest absurdities 
of superstition. Atheism, having nothing to recommend it, 
seeks to pass itself off under the guise of something that is 
better, and is never more ill at ease than when it finds itself 
stripped of the garment of false religion, that it assumes to 
enable it more effectually to make its thrusts at that re- 
ligion which is true. Atheism destroys those generous 
emotions that lead to self-sacrifice for the general good. 
It freezes up the purest sensibilities and the noblest sym- 
pathies of our nature. By introducing as the only standard 
of conduct its mercenary code of selfishness, it effectually 
suppresses all the promptings of virtue and of disinterested 
affection. Having converted the belief of God into a fable, 
and the atoning love of Christ into a device of supersti- 
tion, it destroys, with the highest check upon vice, the 
loftiest hopes of man. Possessing in itself no intrinsic merit, 
giving no good support to society or security to domestic 
purity, it wanders over the earth with the mark of Cain upon 
its forehead, and all the wretchedness of the first murderer in 
its heart. 

No thanks to atheism for those checks that God, in mercy, 
has placed upon its progress, — no thanks to it for that law 
of self-preservation that makes even the most corrupt to 
shudder with the good at the contemplation of its prospec- 
tive triumphs. Well may mothers weep, and children, aban- 
doned, cry, and the aged and oppressed groan in despair, 
when atheism walks with bold and merciless visage in their 
midst ! Well may nature clothe herself in a robe of dark- 
ness, and throw over all her scenes of loveliness and beauty 
a drapery of mourning, when atheism sits upon the world's 
throne, and sings his bloody hymn of victory over the death 
and burial of Christianity ! 

17 



REVEALED THEOLOGY. 



(259) 



REVEALED THEOLOGY. 



CHAPTER I. 



NECESSITY OF A REVELATION FROM GOD. 

The foundation of all our reasoning upon the evidences of 
Christianity rests upon the admission of three truths, estab- 
lished by the light of nature, — God, Conscience, and Man a 
sinner, responsible and free. 

We enter now upon the discussion of the great questions : 

Is the Bible a revelation, in any sense, of the mind and will 
of Cod? 

Were the writers of the Bible inspired by God, and how 
inspired ? 

Have we, in the Old and N'ew Testaments, a clear exhibi- 
tion of the mind, character, purposes, and feelings of God 
toward man ? 

Is not the Bible, in the highest sense, a supreme authority 
for human conduct ? 

What is the proof of the Divine Mission of Christ, and what 
its necessity ? 

If, in reply to these questions, it is shown that the Bible is 
from God, then it must be infinitely superior to any human 
production, as making known God's will, and it must have 
the sanctions of its great Author, demanding our faith and 
obedience. But if the Bible has only a human origin, then 
it must have only a human authority, and consequently our 
obligation to believe and obey it must be measured by a 
human standard. As the words of God are infinitely superior 
in dignity to the words of man, so also, if the Bible contains 
only the words of man, is not inspired, then must it be as in- 

(261) 



262 NECESSITY OF A 

ferior in worth to an inspired production as man himself is 
inferior to God. 

A revelation from God is necessary for us, not only because 
we are sinners, and need every favorable influence to lead us 
in the right way, but especially because the light of nature 
has failed to guide men aright. IN'ow, God has a right to 
speak to us in the way he thinks best. The question for 
us to consider is simply one of fact: Has God spoken to us? 
We cannot prescribe to God the mode of the divine com- 
munications. It is not for us to say how God shall speak to us, 
or when he shall thus do. God may not choose to reveal to 
us all the reasons of his conduct. The infidel objects to the 
Christian scheme because it is a revelation given to us, not 
at once, but at different periods of the world ; but, unless 
this was most pleasing to God, he would not have resorted to 
it. He objects that an obscure nation of Jews was the chosen 
depository of the divine messages to man, but God has a 
right to select whom he pleases for such a work. He objects 
to the difficulties of revelation, but he might as well object 
to the difficulties of nature. He objects to the mysteries of 
the gospel, but there are other mysteries in the world besides 
those of revelation. He objects to many things incompre- 
hensible in the Bible, but his objection is equally valid 
against the incomprehensible of his own body. We might 
go on to speak of many other objections, but it is not neces- 
sary here. Our object is only to establish the proposition 
that whoever admits the existence of God must also admit 
his right to give a revelation of his will in the way and time 
most pleasing to him. The question for us to settle is 
simply a question of fact. 

The Scriptures come to us as the word of God ; they pro- 
fess to be divinely inspired and a revelation of his will. Are 
they what they profess? In deciding upon this question, 
there is one uniform law of belief that is never to be forgot- 
ten. This law is, that we are authorized to believe in any- 
thing when the reasons for belief are greater than the 
reasons for unbelief. Thus, we credit testimony just in pro- 
portion to the evidence existing. By a law of our minds we 



REVELATION FROM GOD. 263 

are authorized to believe whenever the evidence for a thing 
is greater than the evidence against it. The question is not 
so much the degree of evidence that the Bible is the word of 
God, as is there any evidence at all that it is such ? Before 
we are authorized to reject it as a divine revelation, we 
must show that there is greater evidence that it is not such, 
than that it does come from God. It is not for us to pre- 
scribe to God how much evidence he must give us to show 
the Bible divine. Our only course is to take the revelation, 
as it comes to us, and examine its credentials. It may have 
great or small credentials, few or many, but if the word of 
God has any credentials, we are to receive it, so long as no 
evidence exists to the contrary. Here is the stumbling-block 
with many in receiving the Bible as the word of God. They 
prescribe to God just the evidence he must give, and if their 
standard is not reached they reject the Bible; they say we 
must have evidence as demonstrative as mathematical evi- 
dence ; they say such objections in respect to style or his- 
toric narrations of Jewish customs, battles, manners, or lan- 
guage, must be fully cleared up to their satisfaction before 
they receive the Bible as the word of God. All such reasoning 
is alike irreverent and out of place. We have no more right to 
prescribe to God the exact mode or degree of revelation than 
we have the matter of it. This is the business alone of the au- 
thor of revelation and does not concern those who receive it. 
Whether God's revelation comes to us with a high or low 
degree of evidence, whether its mode suits our feelings or not, 
are questions that are not to influence us to the rejection of 
the word of God. Our simple business is, to see if we can 
offset with our evidences, the evidences of Christianity. If 
the evidences of Christianity excel ever so little the evidences 
against it, it is reasonable in us to believe in the Bible. 
Thus, taking a position the most favorable for the unbeliever, 
it can be shown that thousands receive the Bible, and 3'et 
they may give vastlj^ less proof of it than what really exists. 
Here consists the great error of infidelity. It imagines that, 
by raising difficulties in the Bible and apparent inconsisten- 
cies, the Bible can be disproved. But the real question is, 



264 NECESSITY OF A 

Does any evidence exist that the Bible is the word of God? 
If so, that evidence must be disproved before it can be denied 
that the Bible comes from God. If the Bible had but a 
thousandth part of its present evidence, yet that evidence ex- 
isting would sanction belief If we can clear up the difficul- 
ties of the infidel, it is well ; but if we cannot, his infidelity 
does not disprove the Bible. Are there not, however, multi- 
tudes, because of some specious objection, or some verbal 
inaccuracy, who throw away the Bible ? They wait not for 
infidelity to prove miracles and prophecy false and the thou- 
sand internal evidences of the Bible, — they willingly suffer 
the whole to be condemned because of those few difficulties 
which they cannot master. Suppose, for argument, the ob- 
jector to prove out one chapter or book uninspired, he has 
yet, step by step, to prove out every chapter and book of 
revelation uninspired ; suppose him to prove that the evi- 
dence of the Bible as the word of God is small, he has yet to 
prove, before with reason it can be rejected, that there is no 
evidence whatever, great or small, that the Bible is the word 
of God. All this he must do before he can be entitled to con- 
fidence. Should God choose to give us little evidence of 
a divine revelation, then we ought to receive that evidence 
and make the most of it. Evidence is evidence, be it small 
or great, and with no higher evidence to offset it the part of 
reason and good judgment is to receive it. 

Having established the proposition that we are bound to 
believe in all evidence whatever, in proportion to its value 
and truth, and that no evidence, if good, is to be rejected, 
even if small, we will consider the great question of the ne- 
cessity of a revelation from God. If the Bible is not neces- 
sary for us, — if it is useless as it concerns our best interests, 
there is a high presumption against its being the word of 
God. If we do not need a revelation from God it is reasona- 
able to believe that God, who does nothing uselessly, will not 
give us a revelation. On the other hand, if we do need a 
revelation from God to make us better and happier, — if it 
would advance our best interests for this life and the life to 
come to have a divine communication from God, then it is 



REVELATION FROM GOD. 265 

probable that God will give us a revelation to guide, en- 
lighten, and save. To determine the probability of a revela- 
tion from God, from its necessity, we are to consider three 
subjects: God, conscience, and the history of the human race. 
First, let us consider God. His existence is admitted : then, 
in power, he must be inlinite; consequently he can give a re- 
velation with its credentials, when and as he pleases. But 
God is also admitted to be just: then, if there is any way by 
which that justice can be sustained and sinners saved, it 
is highly probable he will make it known. But God is 
admitted to be good: then, if benevolent, it is probable 
he will reveal tha^t which may bless mankind. Here, then, 
is God, powerful, just, and good. Is this truth admitted? 
Where, then, the improbability that he would give, if needed, 
a revelation ? 

Thus, 80 far as God is concerned, we cannot say a revelation 
from him is impossible or improbable. Look to the conscience 
and man's history to see if it is not necessary. Consider the 
conscience, can it be hardened, or blinded, or made treach- 
erous, or unfaithful ? Can the moral nature be so perverted 
as to call evil good, and good evil ? To answer this question 
we point to facts. The world is full of blind, hard, and un- 
faithful consciences. What one thinks is duty, another thinks 
is a crime. The Hindoo believes in self-immolation ; the 
Chinese think infanticide meritorious. The heathen moralist 
glories in suicide, and the worst excesses of impure passion 
by the pagan are justified as most honorable to the Deity. A 
wrong conscience is the parent of the worst deeds of fanati- 
cism, and the constant annoyance of all civil legislation. A 
perverted conscience is the source of all religious delusion, 
even as it is of cruel bigotry. Before the assassin plunges 
the dagger into the heart of his victim he will offer a prayer 
to the Virgin Mary, if not unto God, and the darkest atroci- 
ties of superstition must first be made justifiable by the 
verdict of an unfaithful conscience. Thus do we find the 
strangest inconsistencies approved of by the conscience, and 
the very thing one person believes true or virtuous, another 
condemns as false and vicious. K thus the conscience, which 



266 NECESSITY OF A 

God has given to us, is so perverted, does it not need a divine 
revelation to guide it ? Is there not necessary, in order to cor- 
rect this ever-changing needle,* some infallible standard of 
right conduct? If conscience is all we want to guide us 
right, why does it not thus do ? Is it possible, or probable, 
admitting the goodness of God and his desire to save sinners, 
that he would leave the human family alone to so treacher- 
ous a pilot ? ^o matter if we exclusively are to blame for 
the abuse of conscience, the f\ict, wide as the world, exists of 
its perverted movements. What more probable than that at 
some time a better guide might be given ? 

But there are other reasons why a revelation from God is 
most needful. Consider human experience in past history. 
If the deists think they can get along very well without a 
revelation from God, the greatest geniuses and most gifted 
minds of antiquity did not think so. They deplored the 
wretched state of things, and most fervently prayed for a 
purer light, and better guide. They did not consider nature's 
light enough, rather they felt like blind men groping their 
way over mountains of danger. Plato tells us, " We know 
not of ourselves what worship to pay to God, or what peti- 
tions to offer. We must expect a lawgiver from heaven to 
instruct us; and oh, how I long to see that man, and who he 
is ! he must be of a nature superior to man's [i.e. divine), 
because of the unwillingness of men to be guided except by 
superiors. He must be a mediator." 

Socrates, as revealing the prevailing darkness in respect to 
a future state, said a short time before his death, "I hope 
1 go to good men, but this I do not affirm. I am going out 
of the world, you remain ; which is better is known to 
God." 

In the well-known dialogue between Socrates and Alci- 
biades, on the duties of religious worship, Alcibiades is 
going to the temple to pi'ay; Socrates meets him and dis- 
suades him from prayer on account of his inability to man- 
age the duty aright. " To me," he says, " it seems best to 
be quiet ; it is necessary to wait till you learn how you ought 
to behave towards the gods and towards man." "And when, 



REVELATION FROM GOD. 267 

Socrates! shall that time be, and who will instruct me?" 
says the wondering disciple, " for gladly would I see this 
man who he is." " He is one," replied Socrates, " who cares 
for you; but, as Homer represents Minerva taking away the 
darkness from the eyes of Diomedes that he may distinguish 
a god from a man, so it is necessary that he should first take 
away the darkness from your mind, and then bring near 
those things by which you shall know good and evil." "Let 
him take away," rejoins Alcibiades, " if he will, the darkness 
or any other thing, for I am prepared to decline none of those 
things which are commanded by him, whoever this man is, 
if I shall be made better." 

Plato, speaking of human nature, says, " I have heard 
from the wise men that we are now dead and the body is 
our sepulcher."* Again he says, " The prime evil is inborn 
in souls; it is implanted in men to sin."t Again, "The 
nature of mankind is greatly degenerated and depraved ; all 
manner of disorders infest human nature, and men, being 
impotent, are torn in pieces by their lusts as by so many 
wild horses."! He also speaks of an " evil nature," " an 
evil in nature," "a disease in nature," " a destruction of 
harmony in the soul." Tracing the origin of this diseased 
state, he says, " That in times past the divine nature flour- 
ished in men ; but, at length, being mixed with mortal cus- 
tom, it fell into ruin ; hence an inundation of evils in the 
race."§ Again, " The cause of corruption is from our 
parents, so that we never relinquish their evil way, or escape 
the blemish of their evil habit." || Also, "That after the 
golden age the universe, by reason of that confusion that 
came upon it, would have been quite dissolved had not God 
again taken it upon him to sit at the helm and govern the 
world, and restore its disordered and almost disjointed parts 
to their primeval order."T 

Seneca speaks quite despairingly of our possible recovery 
by any means. He says, " Our corrupt nature has drunk in 



* Gorgias, fol. 493. f Leg. p. 731. % Politicus, p. 274. 

I Critias, p. 400. || Timseus, 103. f Politicus, 251, 



268 NECESSITY OF A 

such deep draughts of iniquity, which are so far incorporated 
in its very bowels that you cannot remove it save by tearing 
them out." And yet he conceives, in the faintest manner, 
some possibility of supernatural aid. "I^o man is able to 
clear himself; let some one give him a hand; let some one 
lead him out."* He also says, as if he were writing out 
another Yllth chapter of the Romans, "What is it, Lucilius, 
that, when we set ourselves in one way, draws us another, 
and when we desire to avoid any course, drives us into it? 
What is it that so wrestles with our mind, allowing us never 
to settle any good resolution once for all ?"t 

Ovid also joins in the same confession. " If I could 
I would be more sane. But some unknown force drags 
me against my will. Desire draws me one way, con- 
viction another. I see the better and ixpprove, the worse I 
follow.''^ 

Thus also Xenophanes closes off his work on nature in these 
words : " IN'o man has discovered any certainty, nor will dis- 
cover it, concerning the gods, and what I say of the uni- 
verse. For if he uttered what is even more perfect, still he 
does not know it, but conjecture hangs over all." 

Pliny, confessing the wretched hunger of his*soul, saw no 
relief to it better than suicide. "It is difficult," he writes, 
^' to say whether it might not be better for men to be wholly 
without religion than to have one of this kind [viz. that of 
his country], which is a reproach to its object. The vanity 
of man, and his insatiable longing after existence, have led 
him also to dream of a life after death. A being full of con- 
tradictions, he is the most wretched of creatures, since the 
other creatures have no wants transcending the bounds of 
their nature; man is full of desires and wants that reach to 
infinity, and can never be satisfied. Among these so great 
evils, the best thing God has bestowed on man is the power 
to take his own life."§ 

Clement, the Roman, tells us how he was harassed from 
childhood by questions which paganism could not help him 

* Ep. 52. t Ep. 52. X Metam. vii. 18. ^ Hist. Nat., lib. vii. 



REVELATION FROM GOD, 269 

to answer : such as relate to his being and immortality, the 
origin of the world and its continuance, when it began, when 
it will end, and whither his present life is to carry him. 
" Incessantly haunted," he says, "by such thoughts as these, 
which came I knew not whence, I was sorely troubled, so 

that I grew pale and emaciated I resorted to the 

schools of the philosophers, hoping to find some certain foun- 
dation. I saw nothing but the piling up and tearing down 
of theories. Thus was I driven to and fro by the different 
representations, and forced to conclude that things appear 
not as they are in themselves, but as they happen to be 
presented on this or that side. I was made dizzier than 
ever, and from the bottom of my heart sighed for deliver- 
ance."* 

Such is nature's longing for something greater than nature's 
light. To see the necessity of a divine revelation, we have 
only to look to ancient and modern paganism. The question 
is not what natural religion can do, but what it has done. 
Has it made clear the unity of God ? Look to the innumer- 
able idols adored of heathen lands ! Has it made manifest the 
moral perfections of God ? Look to the idol gods where 
Christianity does not exist! What their character! Who 
knows not, that has made himself acquainted with their his- 
tory, that they personified every vice most degrading to hu- 
manity ? Has natural religion given any consistent ideas of 
a future state ? Look to the sensual paradise of Mohammed, 
the elysium for heroes of the Greek and Roman mytholo- 
gist ? Look to the Druids' home for warriors, and the bloody 
hall of Odin ! Has natural religion established a good code 
of morals ? Consult the heathen bible for the virtues of hu- 
mility, of disinterested benevolence, of supreme love to God ! 
Has it defined the nature of virtue ? Look to the innumer- 
able speculations of pagan writers ! Amid uncertainty so 
great, how needful a divine revelation ! 

The world has had a fair experiment of what it could and 
would do without it. As age after age rolled on, every form 

* Neander's Hist., vol. i. pp. 32, 33. 



270 NECESSITY OF A 

of superstition was tried, and every device of man had an 
opportunity for development. But how melancholy the 
record of history ! The great empires of the earth rose and 
fell, and nation and individual evinced no self-restoring power. 
In the deepest darkness of mind millions went to the grave; 
but the grave itself Avas not so gloomy as those living waves 
of spiritual death that rolled their dark waters over the 
hopeless fabrics of human science and learning. Philos- 
ophy tried her utmost; and there arose in the academy 
giants in intellect, but they resembled only the larid 
flashes of the thunder-storm that but revealed more 
vividly the surrounding darkness. Legislation and civil 
power tried their utmost to stem the tide of human cor- 
ruption. Dreading the mischief of atheism, and the pas- 
sions unrestrained, the lovers of humanity, appealing to the 
religious principle of our natures, enthroned superstition in 
marble palaces, and gave to idol worship the great seal of 
state ; but religion itself became corrupt as the grave, and 
virtue expired upon the sacrificial altar. Then came the 
appeal to the love of the beautiful, and humanity was tried 
to see if beauty and goodness would coalesce. Painting and 
statuary, such as man never had seen, adorned the temples 
of Athens, and Corinth and Rome became majestic with 
those famed structures of art that every succeeding age has 
only imitated to fail in. But the beautiful neither explained 
virtue nor enforced it, it gave no better idea of God, and the 
golden age of beauty and art did but reveal a deeper abyss of 
human corruption and helplessness. The temple to the un- 
known God was the only temple destitute of a worshiper, and 
the highest age of civilization, even as the darkest abode of 
savage existence, all proclaimed the necessity of a revelation 
from God. 

But to see in the clearest light the absolute need for man's 
highest welfare that God should give a revelation, let us in- 
terrogate the oracles of natural religion to see if there is a 
satisfactory explanation to the question, the most important 
that man can ask. How can man be just with God? 

It is the peculiar glory of the Gospel of Christ to answer 



REVELATION FROM GOD. 271 

this question, and enforce, by every variety of illustration, the 
divinely instituted remedy for sinners. The question before 
us to consider is, Does natural religion explain and make 
intelligent an effectual remedy for sin ? Does the light of 
nature show how man can be just with God? To show most 
clearly the necessity of a revelation from God, we are not 
compelled to prove that the light of nature in no sense can 
make known an atonement for sin. Even admitting that 
there could be some intimations of the mode by which God 
may be just and yet save sinners, yet the great difficulty to 
be met is, — has, as a matter of fact, natural religion in any 
true sense made intelligent and satisfactory to the mind a 
mode by which a just God in consistency with his law can 
pardon and save sinners ? 7/" so, then we believe one great 
design of a revelation fi'om God is useless ; but if not so, then 
we have the highest possible evidence of our need of a divine 
revelation. It is not necessary to enter into the intricacies of 
the question, what, on this subject, natural religion may re- 
veal. We intend to wander into no speculations upon this 
point, but to confine our remarks to fact, and fact alone. 
But in reasoning upon facts, two important ways are needful 
to arrive at a right decision. First, arguments adduced from 
admitted principles, which, in themselves, are facts, — then a 
consultation of history of what has actually taken place. By 
this course, we have two chains to strengthen our argument, — 
right theory, and the results of that theory. A physician, in 
prescribing for his patient, must have a correct theory in his 
mind of the nature and cause of the supposed disease, and 
then he must know, to a good extent, what is actually the 
disease. His correct theory will tell him what medicine to 
give, and his knowledge of the actual state of the disease, 
when to give the medicine. In the same manner are we to 
investigate the question. How can we from the light of na- 
ture learn? How can man be just with God? The neces- 
sity of a revelation from God is evident in other important 
respects. Great and many are the reasons why we should 
welcome it, apart from its wonderful disclosure of the only 
way a sinner can be saved; but here peculiarly we would rest 



272 NECESSITY OF A 

our argument for the absolute need of the Bible that brings 
life and immortality to light. 

God, conscience, and man a sinner, are admitted : natural 
religion shows as much as this. How are we from these 
truths to arrive at the result that God can pardon the sinner, 
and will do it ? Let it be remembered we now are to shut 
our Bibles, and go to work without the light that comes to us 
from the sacred page, to show how God can or will pardon 
and save a rebel against his law. It is confessed that God is 
just, but the first principle of justice is to punish sin ; but if 
God is just, he must have a just law. What, then, is the voice 
of divine law ? Does it not pronounce punishment to the 
sinner ? Does it not give a reward to the obedient ? What 
is our first idea of human law ? Is it not a command with a 
penalty attached for disobedience ? But is that penalty re- 
pentance ? Is repentance the punishment threatened the vio- 
lator of human law? Is contrition for sin and amendment 
for life the penalty denounced by human tribunals against 
those who transgress the law of the state ? Certainly not. 
For no human government could stand a day with law sus- 
tained by such terms. But is advice the penalty of human 
law ? When a thief steals our property, or an assassin mur- 
ders a citizen of a state, and before the legal tribunal is con- 
victed of the same, is the penalty for his transgression ad- 
vice ? Are they told to do better for the future, not again to 
transgress the law, and then dismissed to their former state 
of freedom? But what law^ upon such a condition could 
command respect or have any existence ? Our idea of law is 
evil or punishment inflicted upon its violation. Repentance 
and advice have nothing to do with law. Law does not re- 
cognize such language as appropriate penalties. As repent- 
ance or advice cannot wipe away sin, so are they equally 
ineftectual to sustain the sanctions of human authority. But 
what is true of the law of man, must, for the same reason, be 
true of divine law. It is no more sensible to disrobe the law 
of God of its penalty, than human law. If the law of man 
could not exist with no penalty, equally true divine law could 
not. If we would consider human government as a mockery. 



REVELATION FROM GOD. 273 

with no penalty for disobedience than repentance and advice, 
even so must we loc^k upon divine government. There must 
be, with the one as with the other, punishment for disobe- 
dience. But if that government, be it human or divine, is 
just, then the lawgiver, for the same reason he rewards the 
obedient, must inflict punishment on the disobedient. But 
there is a higher argument for this in conscience. What 
does conscience saj? Is not the first lesson she teaches us 
the lesson that sin deserves punishment ? Does she not con- 
demn us for sin ? Does she say to the sinner. You may de- 
fraud, or commit perjury, or violence upon the person of 
your neighbor, if you but repent of it ? Are good advice and 
repentance the penalties she attaches to sin ? Certainly not. 
Conscience shows us our sins and their desert of punishment, 
and there she stops. She can go no farther than denounce sin, 
and with the verdict she pronounces, if guilty, give to it a 
present punishment, even as a gloomy foreboding of future 
evil. 

Look, then, to the sinner as self-condemned by his ow^n 
conscience. What does the light of nature teach him as a 
remedy for his sin? Is it repentance? But still the sinner 
asks the question. How can this save me under a jnst God ? 
Still the sinner instinctively interrogates his conscience. 
How would it do for a human law to have such a penalty for 
transgression ? Still he asks the question, Provided God did 
save from punishment upon such a condition, what is to be- 
come of his law ? what of respect for his authority ? We ask 
nature, and seek for all the light she can bring us from natu- 
ral religion, to extricate us from this difiiculty. We demand 
something to satisfy our minds, to appease the reproaches of 
conscience, sensible of sin and a violation of God's law, that 
must demand a perfect obedience. As we have no divine 
revelation to go to, showing to us a crucified Saviour offered 
to the acceptance and salvation of all upon faith and love, we 
wish, shut up alone to the Book of Mature, to have natural 
religion teach us the great truth of an atonement for sin. 
We have already come to the conclusion that repentance, or 

18 



2T4 NECESSITY OF A 

good resolutions, or any effort for future obedience, cannot 
save us guilty. 

We have decided that if human law cannot be sustained 
by such sanctions, certainly divine law cannot. If God is 
just, then the more just the more certain the penalty of pun- 
ishment. We wish now to know from nature's light our 
remedy. We wish to solve the greatest of difficulties, — a just 
God and a sinner saved, ^o such mysterious anomaly as 
this can we find in human government. She utters no other 
voice than. Obey or be jMrdshed. No light does conscience 
throw upon this question. With tenfold energy she reite- 
rates the voice of law. Obey or be punished. Again do we in- 
terrogate nature. We ask. How may we be saved from sin ? 
The response comes back to us, cheerless as the grave. Obey 
or be punished. Here we are in a worse than Egyptian dark- 
ness ; but the instinct of preservation will catch at every straw 
that floats upon the troubled sea of human existence. Our 
theory gives us no hope ; its conclusions, from admitted prin- 
ciples, irresistible, reveal no remedy : as a last resort we 
turn to the history of man as actually revealed. The ques- 
tion now is. Is there, throwing theory away, any clearly re- 
vealed remedy for sin in nature's works or in the facts of 
human history ? Remember, we are not to bring in revela- 
tion to help us out of our difficulty. The question is, Can 
we get out of it without revelation? 

By one process of argument I have shown we cannot; I 
am now to resort to another kind of argument, drawn from 
existing facts in the works of nature and man's history. The 
doctrine of revelation is, that Christ, being a divine and j^er- 
feci substitute for sin, has sustained the claims of justice vio- 
lated, and made it consistent with God to save the sinner in 
harmony with a perfect moral law. In other words, it points 
out a way by which the law can be honored and yet the 
sinner saved. The question is. Can we find out from nature's 
works and the history of man a remedy for sin ? Is there 
an intelligible and clear mode made known, except in reve- 
lation, of the way in which a sinner, in consistency with a 
just law, can be saved ? We will give the widest latitude of 



REVELATION FROM GOD, 275 

range, the most liberal concession to the inquirer after the 
solution of this great problem of human destiny without 
revelation. We will say, You may go wherever your reason 
or imagination may lead you to find out how a sinner, under 
a perfect moral government, can be saved in consistency with 
divine law. Where can a divine substitute for sin be found? 
Search the records of nature. Let the inquirer have, as fiir 
as possible, the benefit of the argument derived from the 
principle of substitution seen in the violation of natural law, 
by which we see where a bone is broken, or the flesh cut, or 
the human S3'stem prostrated by disease, that nature, by a 
mysterious power, exerts herself to repair the mischief occa- 
sioned. Let the most be made out of the principle of substi- 
tution seen in human life, where a mother saves by her own 
pains the life of her son, or a father wearies himself with toil 
to provide for his family. Let us give due credit to the 
thousand instances of sufifering for the benefit of others, 
and that mightj^ principle that runs through all society, of 
averting by others those evils that otherwise would fall upon 
ourselves. Here, indeed, is substitution of a certain nature 
seen. As a greater illustration of the principle of substitu- 
tion, let the inquirer of nature point us to the sacrifices 
innumerable of mankind in all ages of bloody victims upon 
the altar to propitiate the favor or avert the anger of heathen 
divinities. And yet where do we find any satisfactory evidence 
of a substitute for sin of such a character as to avert from the 
sinner the punishment of sin ? We see sin followed b}^ pun- 
ishment in this world ; why may it not be in the future ? 
When we have given the most 'favorable construction to a 
remedial system, existing to a limited extent, to avoid natural 
evil, what assurance have we from nature of a system of 
redemption for the lost sinner? After gleaning up all the 
favorable evidences we can to throw light upon the problem, 
How can God be just and the sinner saved ? how much is the 
darkness removed ? Search the world over with no Bible, 
and to what is the sinner directed as a ground of hope 
that he may be saved? We have already seen that we 
cannot look to repentance as a valid foundation to rest upon. 



'216 NECESSITT OF A 

We must look to some principle of substitution, some person 
who can bear our sins and sustain himself a broken law. 
But we wish to find out where that substitution is in nature, 
and the remed}^ for our wants that is presented. We cer- 
tainly cannot delude ourselves with the idea that brute ani- 
mals can save us from the punishment of sin. What value 
in their blood to avert the sword of divine justice ? We 
cannot look to a mortal man like ourselves for a remedy; he 
cannot, as a sinner, save himself, much less save us. We 
cannot look for an atonement to the collective purity or good- 
ness of any number of men, in any age or every age. 'No 
human goodness can cancel the sin of a single day, much less 
the sins of a whole life. Let us, then, search the world over 
to see if we can find a perfect being, one who never has 
sinned. I will suppose that such a spotless illustration of 
humanity has actually been found: I will suppose that one 
man, escaping every taint of corruption and as pure as Adam 
unfalleu, has been discovered. Let us make him an atone- 
ment for our sins. But can we do it? He can save himself 
only when perfect in obeying divine law ; as a subject of law, 
all he can do is to obey law. What works of supererogation 
has he to offset the sins of mankind? What can he do to 
avert from a single sinner the penalty of law? He can do 
nothing. We must go to a source higher even than law 
itself; we must mount to a height of dignity so lofty, that 
law, even like the clouds that encircle the earth, is tran- 
scended by the majestic summit that towers above in the 
heavens. Where does the light of nature show us such a 
substitute ? Where, except in revelation, do we find the 
anomaly of God and man united, — of humanity to sufter for 
our sins, and divinity to honor the law ? Where in nature 
do we find one person possessing traits so diverse and so 
peculiar, that every claim of the Godhead and yet every 
interest of man are blended together in harmony ? 

Here is conscience, in the heart of man, condemning for 
sin, but we ask in vain of her for a remedy. She shows us 
our ruin, but no way of escaping from it. Here is divine 
law speaking the same language that human law does, — that 



REVELATION FROM GOD. 217 

repentance or fnture obedience is no atonement for sin. 
Here is man in Lis history, in every age, experiencing the 
evils of sin, and yet in vain striving to satisfy the claims of 
justice by the sacrifice of animals or the bodil}' tortures of 
self-immolation. Where, with no revelation to guide us, is 
the remedy for sin? AVe will consult the nations of antiquity. 
Upon the fertile plain of Dura, where the ancient Assyrian 
worshiped, is the temple of Babel, — long is that procession 
that ascends the steps of Babylon's great tower. Here are 
worshiped the sun, and moon, and stars; but in these 
heathen rites do we find a remedy for sin ? Again, we visit 
the land of the ancient Canaanite, and see a ferocious multi- 
tude shouting at the infant crj' that ascends from the bloody 
arms of Moloch. Is it here we find consolation for a troubled 
conscience ? , ]^ow, in famed Ephesus, we view the great 
temple of Diana, the wonder of the world ; but in the pro- 
fane scenes there witnessed do we find a relief to the mind ? 
Disgusted with the impure and cruel homage paid to idols, 
we turn to the schools of the philosophers and visit the quiet 
scenes of the Academy and the Porch. Here is the collected 
wisdom of the world ; here the learned few come to specu- 
late upon the mysterious problem of human destiny. We 
listen, with eager interest, to the sages of the old world, — but 
the first of all truths — of an Infinite God, the Creator of the 
universe from nothing — is not settled ; all the boasted philoso- 
phy of centuries of learning commences in a fundamental 
error, — the denial of a Creator of matter and spirit. From 
nothing nothing can come, is that axiom of delusion that 
alike subverted the immortality of the soul and the infinite 
wisdom and power of one Supreme God. 

AVe wish to find out the nature of virtue, but of the three 
hundred definitions given, not one includes humility or 
disinterested benevolence. We inquire, What is the chief 
end of man ? The Epicurean places it in pleasure, — the 
Stoic, in the suppression of our natural sympathies. We 
ask for the evidence of a future state. The disciples of 
Pythagoras speak to us of the transmigration of souls into 
different animals, and those of Plato of the existence of souls 



278 NECESSITY OF A 

before the world. "We ask, Who are the favored residents of 
heaven? and we are pointed to warriors whose fatal violence 
has desolated the eartli, and made bv reveno^e and craft nn- 
numbered beins^s most miserable and deo-raded. 

Bewildered amid contradictions so great, and errors so 
many, upon the plainest truths of Christianity, we try once 
more to see what light the famed seats of human learning 
and art could throw upon the most practical and most inter- 
esting of all questions, IIow can man be just with God ? But, 
instead of one God of infinite, natural, and moral perfection, 
we are pointed to a thousand subordinate divinities, and we 
must first balance our accounts with them before even we 
may presume to think of the presiding deity of the pagan 
Pantheon ; and then, when we have reached the last of the 
o'ods, what do we find? A beinij: havinir no interest in his 
creatures, and so absorbed in himself as to leave to others the 
management of human afiairs. But, worse than this, the very 
vices that conscience upbraids us for are deified in gods, not 
to worship which is a state ofiense. "N'eed it be said that we 
may try in vain to find out anything upon the greatest of 
truths, when even the alphabet of a divine revelation is 
unknown ? 

Let us then interrosiate everv other reliiJ-ion but that of the 

CD V O 

Bible for an answer to the question, How shall man be just 
with God? We will leave the pagan rites of the South Sea 
Islander, and the dark atrocities of those cannibal supersti- 
tions that degrade the Malay and the Patagonianto the level 
of the brute ; we will not rehearse the story of those Mexican 
priests whose temples, dedicated to the god of war and the 
hosts of heaven, struck terror in the heart of the stern Span- 
iard when he viewed the skulls of thousands of victims 
offered in bloody sacrifices to their sanguinary deities ; we 
will go to those better religions, venerable for their existence 
through long centuries, and holding in their iron grasp mil- 
lions of worshipers. But we appeal in vain for any light to 
show how, as sinners, we may be saved, to the devotees of the 
Grand Lama, or that vast empire of China whose only Bible 
consists in the principles of Confucius. We then turn to 



REVELATION FROM GOD. 279 

Mohammedanism, stretching its gloomy sway over the fairest 
regions of Africa and the great continent of Asia; but the 
Koran gives to us a morality without love, and a religion 
without faith ; propagated by the sword, it is no less cruel in 
its practice than corrupt in its rewards ; offering no true 
atonement for sin, it gives no other pardon than a home for 
sensualists. 

Finally, as a last resort, we will go to the evangelists of 
infidelity and read over the acts of the apostles of Deism. 
Perhaps these new lights can tell us something better than 
the Bible, and prove how useless to us is a revelation from 
God. But who of this Ishmael arm}' of infidels shall be our 
authoritative standard of belief and practice? Shall we take 
Spinoza, or Strauss? But the one proves out the universe 
God, the other God is the universe. Shall we, fiying from 
this German abyss of speculative nonsense, resort to the more 
intelligent epistles of Voltaire or Rousseau ? But the fonner, 
fighting all his lifetime against religion, died in the arms of 
the Roman Catholic Church; and the other, a notorious 
debauchee, died, saying, " O God, I give thee my soul, pure 
and untainted as it came from thy hands !" 

Shall we go to the English school of infidels? Lord Herbert 
declares lust and passion no more blameworthy than thirst 
and hanger. Hobbes denied any real distinction between 
right and wrong. Lord Bolingbroke placed the chief hap- 
piness of man in the gratification of the sensual nature. 
Hume declared self-denial and humility positive vices. If the 
first principles of morality are denied, who among these 
Ishmaelites of absurd confusion, can tell us how a just God 
can pardon a sinner ? 

We are driven to revelation alone for an answer to this 
question. There and there only is the great problem of human 
destiny solved; and if we fi.nd it not there we find it in no 
other place. 

Here do we take our stand, and show, by an argument 
that must be irresistible to every reasoning, upright mind, 
the infinite necessity of a revelation from God, — a necessity 
based upon the deepest wants of our nature, — a necessity so 



280 NECESSITY OF A REVELATION FROM GOD. 

great that, if revelation is not true, there is not oue ray of 
light to cheer the wretched famil}' of man, — a necessity such 
as our nature, spiritual and immortal, must, if it ever does 
awake to its destitution, feel too mighty for language to de- 
scribe, — a necessity so commanding, that it would be high 
treason to God to disavow, and an act of perjury to con- 
science to deny. 

What, then, is the gospel remedy for sin ? How does it 
teach justification with God? All is summed up in the 
words, " Where sin hath abound,ed, grace doth much more 
abound." The advent, life, death, and resurrection of Christ 
have introduced us into an economv of 2:race. Law is sus- 
tained by the great Mediator; justice is satisfied. The sinner 
is saved not because he comes up to that which the law de- 
mands, but simply that he fulfills the conditions of grace. 
The language of law is. Do and live ; of grace, Live and do. 
Law says. Obey perfectly, and you shall be saved ; grace says, 
Believe in Christ, and you shall be saved. The obedience of 
the one is legal; of the other, evangelical. The obedience 
of the law is alike impossible and hopeless. Try ever so 
hard, and you come short of it. Go through with self-in- 
flicted tortures, but these do not save. Make the most of 
your merits and good works, but they cannot come up to the 
standard of divine law. But salvation by grace honors the 
law, because it secures w^hat the law does not, — the obedience 
of love. Our sins had dug for us a gulf fathomless in wretch- 
edness; the}' had erected a wall of separation between us 
and God, high as heaven and deep as perdition; but the vi- 
carious sacrifice of Christ bridges over that gulf, surmounts 
that wall, gives to us an open communication with heaven. 
The mystery of the- cross angels desire to look into, for the 
cross averts from our heads the sword of justice, bids the 
trembling sinner hope even unto the end, banishes from the 
soul despair, assures him that justification, impossible by law, 
is possible by Christ, and bids him seize the outstretched 
hand of the angel of hope, and, from the deepest hell of his 
own corruptions, to ascend up to the highest heaven of God's 
love. 



CHAPTER 11. 



CHRIST. 



The birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ are the 
foundation of all revelation ; consequently the all-important 
question at once presents itself to the mind, Is Christ that 
which he professes himself to be ? Is he the Sou of God ? 
Does he truly establish his claims to be heard and obeyed by 
works that prove him to be all that the Bible asserts ? 

Eirst, consider, is Christ merely a fiction of the imagina- 
tion, a brilliant idea of an unreal personage got up by enthu- 
siasts or intentional deceivers ? There have been those who 
have thought thus, — some, who have contrived to force 
themselves into the belief that Christ was not an actual per- 
son as delineated, but one invented by the mind for a certain 
end. Suppose, then, to prove a real Christ appearing in 
the world at the commencement of the Christian era, we 
follow the stream of time back, so that we may have as near 
a view as possible of the divine author of Christianity. We 
will go to the most reliable sources, and from them find out 
the solution to a question of vast interest. Was Christ a 
fiction or a reality, a person or a painting? 

iTero's persecution of the Christians took place in the sixty- 
fourth and sixty-fifth years of our era. The execution of 
Christ by Pilate occurred about thirty-five years previously. 
As Bayne, in liis work on the testimony of Christ to Chris- 
tianity, has well said : " This Christ, who was honored in 
Rome in a manner so transcendent, in a manner which, on 
the showing of Tacitus, resembled the honor paid to a God, 
had lived only so long before. Whatever time is required to 
account for the phenomenon of Christ's worship on such a 
scale and with such an intensity, is rigidly confined within 
thirty-five years. If legend was accumulated ; if incident 

(281) 



282 CHRIST. 

was exaggerated; if fable was invented; if a real individual 
was invested with a garment of m3^th ; if the popular im- 
ao^ination surrounded him with a halo, and mao^nified him 
into a divinity ; if enthusiasm contributed its colored fiincies, 
fanaticism its distempered heat, and superstition its darker 
imaofcrv, — the whole work had to be done in little more than 
the number of years which now, in 1862, have elapsed since 
the death of Walter Scott." 

Let us now turn to Tacitus, the Eoman historian, and care- 
fully read over those words, the truth of which is undisputed. 
" The most skeptical criticism," says Gibbon, whose au- 
thority in such a case is absolutely conclusive, " is obliged to 
respect the integrity of this celebrated passage of Tacitus." 
The circumstances are thus detailed by Tacitus : 

"I^ero judiciall}' accused of the offense and punished with 
the most studied torments a set of men, hated for their 
wickedness, who were commonly called Christians. The 
author of that sect was Christ, who, in the reign of Tiberius, 
suffered death by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate. 
The vile superstition, repressed for a time, again broke out, 
not only in Judea, the nest of mischief, but in the city also, 
whither all atrocious and scandalous things flow, and where 
all flourish. At first those only were apprehended who con- 
fessed themselves of that sect ; afterward a vast multitude 
discovered by them, all of whom were condemned, not so 
much for the crime of burning the city as for their enmity 
to mankind. Their executions were so contrived as to ex- 
pose them to derision and contempt. Some were covered 
with the skins of wild beasts, that they might be torn to 
pieces; some crucified; while others, having been daubed 
over with combustible materials, were set up as lights in the 
night-time, and thus burned to death. For these spectacles 
Nero gave his own gardens, and at the same time exhibited 
there the diversions of the circus, sometimes standing in the 
crowd as a spectator, in the habit of a charioteer, and at other 
times driving a c.hariot himself; until at length these men, 
though really criminal and deserving exemplary punishment, 
began to be commiserated as people who were destroyed not 



CHRIST. 283 

out of regard to the public welfare, but only to gratify the 
cruelty of one man." 

Observe this great fact. Christ, the author of Christianity, 
came into a sin-loving and persecuting world; he distinctlj' 
told his disciples that as their Master was treated so would 
thej^ be; as he was hated, so also would be their condition. 
The disciples, then, of Christ were not deceived as to the real 
character of his mission. They knew that the opposition of 
the world must be encountered, — its contempt, its wrath, its 
malice, its misapprehension and fiercest attacks upon their 
persons, property, and reputation. Xow, this passage of Taci- 
tus described a notorious fact within thirty-live years from 
Christ's death. 

The question now is. Are men so fond of fiction as to sufifer 
60 much for it, knowing it to be such ? Who can say that 
at a period of the world where the mind was peculiarly re- 
tentive of great events and personages, especially if of recent 
existence, where the scarcity of all parchments and their cost- 
liness made it of the first importance to tell of facts as they 
really took place, any motive could exist for taking up with 
a fictitious Christ, or any stor}' whatever not founded on 
fact ? Remember, thirty-five 3'ears was a very short time in- 
deed to fiibricate a lie; and then, when that lie exposed to 
persecution and death, is it possible that it could be success- 
ful ? [NTow, men do not naturally love persecution, igno- 
miny, or death: if these evils are encountered, some powerful 
motive must exist to induce submission to them. Tacitus 
distinctly asserts that thousands were persecuted and put to 
death for Christ, because they believed in him, and openly 
professed his name. Is it possible that, if there was no 
Christ, any could be found voluntarily taking up with that 
which they knew was false, and suffering persecution for 
such an end? Is it possible Christ's disciples would give up 
all earthly comfort, peace, or reward, for only the fiction of 
a Christ? The supposition that they were sincere, but de- 
luded with the idea of a Christ when there was no Christ, is 
equally absurd. They had too much at stake to be easily 
deceived: deceit was their ruin, truth their salvation. Did 



284 CHRIST. 

only tliirtj-iive years elapse and yet they not know a real 
person from a fictitious one, especially when mistake sub- 
jected them to all manner of tribulations, with nothing what- 
ever to be gained by it ? 

But let us consult Jewish accounts of Christ. The Talmud- 
ical literature of the second century gives great importance 
to Christ's miracles. " The later Jews," says Mr. Baden 
Powell, in ''Essays and Reviews," "adopted the strange 
legend of the Sepher Toldeth Jeshu (book of the generation 
of Jesus), which describes his miracles substantially as in the 
Gospels, but says that he obtained his power by hiding himself 
in the temple, and possessing himself of the secret inefiable 
name by virtue of which such wonders could be wrought." 

Mr. Powell quotes also, from Limborch, this statement of 
Orobio, a Jewish writer: — "The Jews disbelieved, not be- 
cause they denied that the works which are related in the 
Gospels were done by Jesus, but because they did not suiter 
themselves to be persuaded by them that Jesus was the 
Messiah." Here, then, we have Jewish as well as Roman 
testimony to the fact that such a person as Christ actually 
existed, and then we have the highest proof from the sufi:er- 
ings of the early Christians that they did not die for a fiction, 
but were persuaded on the best of evidence that Jesus of 
!N"azareth lived, taught, and died to save men. Such a per- 
son, then, as Christ, sufi:ered and died under Pontius Pilate, 
the Roman governor. For more than eighteen centuries the 
Christian Church has commemorated his death. The two 
sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper, observed by 
millions through all these centuries, testity to the most unde- 
niable of facts, that Christ did live and die as narrated by the 
four Evangelists. 

The question of the greatest interest now presents itself. 
What was the personal character of Christ, both intellectual 
and moral ? We will look simply in a human relation, and 
for argument's sake consider him as we would any man, 
to testify to important facts. Certain things were declared 
by Christ himself. Was Christ competent to testify to these 
things of himself, and was he truthful? If iyicomioeteni, he 



CHRIST. 285 

miglit be mistaken ; \i untruthful, he certainly deceived ; and in 
either case we cannot credit the works alleged of him. 
Kotice, then, the intellectual and the moral character of 
Christ, because upon a correct idea of both will depend the 
solution of all the difficulties that are presented in his pro- 
fessed works. Yol limes innumerable have been written 
upon Christ's character. He has engrossed the thoughts of 
the purest and the noblest intellects of every age, and yet it 
may be said with the greatest truth that new beauties and 
new wonders are presented under whatever aspect Christ is 
viewed. The theme is utterly inexhaustible. We may view 
this or that development of the Saviour's character, and yet it 
rises up before the mind with such a mysterious grandeur, 
such a sacred majesty, so unapproachable in its purity, so 
profound in its wisdom, so transparent in its simplicity, so 
unique in its manifestation, so perfectly' consistent and true 
and right, that infidels, even while denying his supernatural 
nature or works, have confessed with amazement his tran- 
scendent excellence. 

In a single chapter but very little can be said of the charac- 
ter of our Saviour, and yet enough to show that of all men 
Christ had an intellect of the clearest, sharpest, and most 
wonderful strength. liTot one cloud of error passed over it. 
Sagacity of the rarest nature distinguished him. Always 
self-possessed, he never for a moment was at a loss to say 
the right word at the right time. Christ ever manifested the 
highest wisdom. He outwitted his foes, while he con- 
founded their malice. But what adds peculiar force to the 
mind of Christ was his perfect knowledge of that which he 
should be called to go through with. He was prepared for 
every exigency, because he knew just what was the trial of 
his patience. 

It is impossible to look to the intellect of Christ without 
noticing the sharp outline of those features that gave abso- 
lute distinctness to the ideas advanced, and appropriateness 
to all his words. The four Evangelists dwell mostly upon the 
three last years of his life ; they give us only a few hints of 
the period of his infancy and youth. Doubtless Christ, as a 



286 CHRIST. 

man, grew in stature and knowledge ; with perfect humanity, 
he always conformed to its essential conditions ; nothing out 
of place, but everything is in place both in his words and 
conduct. Christ's intellect came in contact with all condi- 
tions of men, the high and the low, the weak and the power- 
ful, the learned and the unlearned, and yet not in the slight- 
est degree was it ever injured by this contact so intimate. 
iS'or did Christ in his youth enjoy the advantages of the 
schools ; he lived in I^azareth, a by-word even with the Jews 
for its dissoluteness of manners, its ignorance and wicked- 
ness ; his parents were poor, himself brought up to the trade 
of a carpenter. We have no evidence that he had any ad- 
vantages whatever for learning; his occupation precluded him 
from the leisure essential for success in acquiring much 
knowledge. Surrounded by influences the most unfriendly, 
the child of poverty, toiling from day to day to obtain sub- 
sistence for his body, encouraged by no persons in power, he 
yet suddenly emerges fi'om his obscurity and draws upon 
himself the eager gaze of all classes in society, not only be- 
cause of his wisdom, but those mighty works that challenged 
the severest scrutiny, while they carried with them the 
clearest evidence of his Messiahship. 

Observe how Christ unfolded truth to his disciples, how 
wisely he conformed his instructions to their situation, w^hile 
all the plots of his enemies were unmasked by the inimitable 
excellence and point of his language toward them. Could 
the profoundest, clearest, strongest intellect the Avorld has 
ever seen be mistaken as to whether miracles were worked 
or not? — whether works were performed accrediting his 
mission or not? Remember, Christ declared, over and over 
again, that his works showed him from God, and challenged 
the most embittered of his foes to examine them. Remem- 
ber that, however we may view Christ, one thing is certain, 
he knew what he was about. Jesus did know whether he 
worked miracles or not. He was no enthusiast, no visionary 
mortal, capable, by the excess of his imagination or the undue 
development of any other faculty of the mind, of being de- 
ceived. His perfect self-possession and intuitive sagacity, that 



CHRIST. 287 

singular discerument that never for an instant forsook him, 
the character of his instructions, his answers to the Scrihes 
and Pharisees, and all his actions, evinced one thing, — Christ 
knew what he was ahout ; others might he deceived, but he 
was not; others might attach an exaggerated importance to 
unessentials, but Christ did not. The knowledge he dis- 
played, his lofty serenity, his amber-like clearness of intel- 
lect, that saw ever absolute truth without imperfection, that 
robust strength of thought that grasped in a moment the 
most perplexing subjects and unraveled difficulties that 
for centuries had perplexed the wisest thinkers, all testify to 
one self-evident truth, — Christ knew what he icas about. This 
is especially evident when we consider that there is not one 
instance on record of his ever being mistaken, ever being 
outwitted by his enemies. They tried often to ensnare him, 
but he uniformly confounded them. Thus, in the question 
of the tribute-mone}', in that of the woman who had married 
seven husbands, or the one taken in adultery, or the leply to 
the Scribes and Pharisees who would have him tell by what 
authority he acted, and in many other instances, Christ never 
spoke unadvisedly, or in any way placed himself in a false 
position. 

Have we not, then, the most conclusive evidence that 
Christ knew what he was about, and could not be wanting in 
intelligence ? The next question to be considered is, Was 
Christ honest? was he true? was he what he professed himself 
to be ? Here notice a most remarkable fact: very few indeed 
even of those who have rejected the Bible as the word of 
God, and denied the reality of miracles, have ever been so 
presumptuous as to assert that Christ Avas dishonest. The 
greatest skeptics have recoiled instinctively from such an idea, 
so fearful and so repulsive. We can safely say that the 
worst of infidels would shudder to assert that Christ was an 
impostor. Whatever may be said against Christianity, the 
last and the most unfounded of all assertions is that which 
impeaches the moral character of Christ. Remember how 
monstrous the thought, that one whose instructions were so 
full of wisdom, tenderness, love, and compassion, whose life 



288 CHRIST. 

was so marked by self-denial and voluntary sniFering for 
others' good, whose whole history, from the cradle to the 
grave, was that of the highest illustration of innocence, 
should be capable of dishonesty ! 

Observe Christ as he revealed himself in his conduct and 
instructions, and say where can an instance be found of the 
least swerving from the rule of the most absolute rectitude. 
As the mind thinks of those varied and extraordinary condi- 
tions of his life, where our Saviour came in contact with sin 
in its most malignant shape, can it be shown that his spot- 
less raiment of righteousness was defiled by the least stain? 
Observe that occasions were presented of severest trial ; and 
yet did all this trial produce any other effect than to reveal 
with a brighter luster his wonderful virtue ? Follow Christ 
from the commencement of his ministry of three years to 
its consummation upon the cross, and say whether the ex- 
quisite sensitiveness of his nature yielded ever so little before 
the force of temptation? 

Now, one thing is certain, either Christ worked the mira- 
cles he professed, either he was all he taught of himself, or 
he was dishonest. There is really no other alternative. We 
have seen his amazing sagacity and intelligence, and this 
fact establishes the proposition, — Christ hiieiv what he loas 
about; if so, then we are shut up to the alternative, — Christ 
was what he professed himself to be, or he was dishonest. 
We hold the skeptic to this stern, this irresistible fi\ct. In 
our other chapters we give proofs from many sources to show 
the Bible from God; but this only goes to show that Christ 
also was from God; and if so, then what he said was true, 
and what he worked confirms his words as perfectly reliable 
and deserving of confidence. 

In the remarkable work of ^' Ecce Homo," where the au- 
thor contemplates mostly the human of Christ, it will be 
seen that he has portrayed with marked ability this aspect 
of our Saviour. Let us look closely to the humanity of 
Christ alone, and it will be found that, considered simply as 
a man, the sun at noonday is not more visible in the heavens 
than is displayed the honesty of Christ in all that he said or 



CHRIST. 289 

did ; and yet that honesty in a human relation involves 
Christ's honesty in a divine relation, and the truth he spoke 
as a man irresistibly forces us to confess his truthfulness as 
the Son of God. l^o person can confess his veracity as the 
Son of man, without crossing that line that tells of his truth- 
fulness as the Son of God. For certain purposes it may be 
well to contemplate Christ in simply a human relation, but 
the mind, as it gazes at the fairest picture of humanity that 
ever the world has seen, must, if true to itself, pass into the 
awfully mysterious domain of his divine attributes, ^ot the 
prismatic colors of the sunbeam are so blended together as 
the supernatural and the human in Christ. Not a drop of 
water so holds in its composition the elements of hydrogen 
and oxygen as does the person of Jesus the twofold excel- 
lence of a human and divine nature. All this must be ad- 
mitted if we confess his miracles; and his miracles must be 
admitted if we hold to his honesty. If it is impossible to 
conceive of Christ as imposed upon, equally difficult is it to 
imagine him to deceive. 

AVhich horn of the dilemma does the skeptic take ? Does 
ne say Christ was imposed upon ? Then he must admit his 
destitution of intelligence, his incompetence, his extraordi- 
nary want of all discernment and wisdom ; but, worse than this, 
he must also declare that the apostles were deceived as to 
Christ's miracles, and that his enemies who confessed them 
true while they attributed them to Beelzebub, and also the 
Christians of the first century, were deluded, and suffered 
only in the cause of deception. Take the other horn of the 
dilemma; Was Christ an impostor? Did he act untruthfully 
or deceitfully? But this supposition, that should blister the 
tongue of any mortal who would make it, is at war with the 
first dictate of conscience, and equally at war with every 
principle of correct reasoning or good sensibility. 

That man may well tremble who throws upon the charac- 
ter of Christ the imputation of dishonesty. No, not the 
worst infidels will do this. They will shut their eyes to 
the proofs of Christ's divine mission, while they praise his 
virtues; they will extol his goodness, his love, his mercy, his 

19 



290 CHRIST. 

tender sympathy with the suffering, his wisdom, his moral 
beauty, and yet they will turn round and deny the super- 
natural of his character, and refuse to credit his miracles. 
They will call his incarnation a fiction, and his resurrection 
a delusion. Monstrous inconsistency ! Admit a God, and 
deny that he cannot become incarnated in his Son ! Admit 
sin, and yet refuse to see its only remedy ! Admit Christ's 
virtue, and deny his works ! Admit that Jesus was all sym- 
pathy, love, sincerity, and truth, and yet refuse to see or 
hear what he says of himself! Admit everything human, 
and yet impeach that humanity really of deception ! All 
this the skeptic must do unless he is willing to take the New 
Testament and interpret it simply according to the plain 
meanino^ of the lanocuas-e. 

The question is. Did Christ do what he said he would do? 
Was he what he professed to be ? Did Christ work miracles 
as conclusive evidence, Avith the end for which he came, and 
the nature of his instructions, that he came from God and 
was heaven-descended? If he ivas thus, then he was honest; 
if not, then could he be honest ? 

Let us, then, contemplate Christ in what he said of himself 
and that which he professed to do. Three things we have 
attempted to show: First, Christ was no fiction; secondly, 
7iot deceived; thirdly, no deceiver. Let us now consider what 
Christ said of himself and what was said of him by the 
apostles. The argument is cumulative. If inspired men 
confirm all that Christ declared himself to be, and testify to 
the reality of his works, then the evidence comes with aug- 
mented force to show that the character of Christ involved 
his works, and his works his character; his veracity proves his 
miracles, and his miracles his veracity; his disciples show the 
truthfulness of their Master, and that truthfulness proves the 
reality of their discipleship. In our other chapters the evi- 
dence of prophecy and miracles is given, with many other 
proofs. All that now is needed, is to quote the words of 
Jesus himself and the apostles of Jesus, showing clearly that 
unless we impeach Christ's character we must admit his 
works and the reality of his divine mission. When John 



CHRIST. 291 

the Baptist was thrown into prison, he sent messengers to 
ask directly of Christ whether he was the Messiah or not. 
Jesus answered, "Go and show John again those things 
which ye do hear and see: the hlind receive their sight, and 
the lame walk: the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear: 
the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached 
to them; and blessed is he whosoever shall not be offended 
in me." Two things here are directly asserted: miraculous 
power, and to the poor proclamation of good tidings. Ob- 
serve that miracles are never divorced from their end ; they 
are always worked for a w^orthy object. The four evangel- 
ists represent Christ as working miracles ; they are inter- 
woven in the whole web of his ministry. Christ referred to 
his mighty works as aggravating the guilt immeasurably of 
the cities that rejected him. He speaks thus of his works : 
" The works that I do in my Father's name, they bear wit- 
ness of me." ]^ow, Christ never had a low idea of his mira- 
cles. In the circumstances of his advent, life, and mission, 
they were of incalculable value. The method of proof he 
proposed was of the most direct and positive character. 
Christ plainly pointed to his works. These works, says 
Christ, are my credentials, the royal seal of God himself; 
and, thus addressing those who heard him and saw his mira- 
cles, he challenged them to show those miracles false, or to 
prove that they were worked by any other than God's own 
Son. Christ challenged the Jews in any respect to show 
him a sinner, or in the least thing to prove him recreant to 
his duty to man or God. They could not do it; his enemies 
were dumb before him, — absolutely confounded by the 
demonstrations he gave of his authority as the true prophet 
of God and his own well-beloved Son. Miracles by Christ 
had always an evidential character, simply worked as an un- 
ans^^erable argument to show that he was just what he pro- 
fessed himself to be. Christ did not say that his life or his 
teachings alone proved him from God; but, taken in connec- 
tion with his miracles, none could refuse to reject him with- 
out the deepest guilt and exposure to the severest punishment 
of God. Think for a moment how eagerly the enemies of 



292 CHRIST. 

our Saviour would have seized upon one false miracle and 
made mountains out of a single mistake, if Christ gave them 
really this opportunity. But Christ did not give his crafty 
foes an inch of land to stand upon, — he left them all sus- 
pended in the air by the cord of their own malice. Thus, 
observe, no charge was brought against Christ before Pilate 
of working false miracles. Christ was fully in the power of 
his enemies ; but they could not point to a single instance of 
deception on his part, cither in his actions or his words. 
They cloaked their hatred indeed under the charge of blas- 
phemy, and yet they perversely shut their eyes to the only 
thing that was able to prove it, and that was to show that 
Christ worked 7io mirades. Observe the ocular and tactual 
demonstration of his resurrection given to Thomas. Christ 
did not repel him, but invited him to the fullest proof of his 
miraculous victory over the grave. What more appropriate 
exclamation after such a proof than those words of amaze- 
ment that broke from his lips, "My Lord and my God !" 

Read over the declarations of the evangelists and of Paul 
respecting Christ's miracles, and can anything be more plain 
than that Christ professed to raise the dead, and did thus 
actually do ? To add tenfold weight to his proof of oneness 
with God, and his divine commission as the Saviour of the 
w^orld, he confidently predicts his own death, and lays down 
his life in confirmation of this truth. Thus there is the 
highest possible evidence given that he was what he professed 
himself to be, in that he made his death and resurrection 
credentials that he was sent from God. Observe especially 
how Christ spoke of those who would not believe upon him. 
Did Christ work no miracles, he could not thus speak without 
bringing into absolute contempt his mission, even in the 
minds of his disciples. Who ever made assertions of such 
startling importance, or assumed a position of such amazing 
significance ? What words of awful grandeur fell from his 
lips, all directly assuming equality with God, and leaving 
the impression upon the mind that while in one sense he was 
man, in another sense he was infinitely above man, and dis- 
tinct from him! It is self-evident that assumptions of such 



CHRIST. 293 

startling significance must rest upon the solid basis of mira- 
cles, or thej would be indignantly repelled by even his sin- 
cerest friends. 

Christ had to do with three classes of persons — open ene- 
mies, curious spectators, weak but true disciples. Certainly 
his bitter foes, and his prying and indifferent spectators, 
would not for a moment regard him, or be silenced by him, 
unless he did work miracles; and his disciples without them 
could not be persuaded to follow him. IN'ow, the foes of 
Christ could do nothing against him except under false pre- 
tenses, while the curious confessed his mighty works, while 
they would not deny themselves for him, and his disciples 
had their faith every day confirmed, until it became a con- 
viction of the mind so strong as to lead them to forsake all 
worldly good to secure the approbation of their Master, en- 
daring all evils for that cause that enlisted the highest love 
of their hearts. 

Observe also the oneness of all Christ's purposes for the 
benefit of the world. Jesus was singularly elevated above the 
age in which he lived. With Jewish bigotry he had no 
sympathy ; he favored neither the exclusiveness of Judaism 
nor the vices of Gentileism. There was a unity in all his 
conduct, a oneness of aim that never deviated from the most 
perfect rectitude. If Christ had not been what he professed 
himself to be, he could not uniformly have persevered in the 
course he did. "When we read the historians of Christ, we 
find all the four evangelists agreeing in recording, without 
collusion, the everyday acts of his life, and his instructions 
to his disciples. They all agree in confirming the miracles 
he worked, and reveal Christ as always having the same great 
end in view, even the salvation of the world. jSTot a single 
valid discrepancy can be found ; not one conflicting statement. 
Look to the grandeur of the end Christ ever had in his mind. 
How infinitely insignificant the temporal glory of a nation 
to the salvation of the world ! How mean the benefit of an 
earthly state in comparison to the salvation of the soul ! In 
contrast, how contracted all the glory of the earth ! 

It is in the nobleness of all Christ's instructions and life 



294 CHRIST. 

that we see also the impossibility of deception. From the 
manger to the cross, all had an intimate relation to this great 
end. As the great author of redemption, Christ never for a 
moment permitted himself to lose sight of it. Appearing 
in an age singuhirly bigoted, among a people attached to 
idolatry, to the Mosaic ritual and the ceremonial law, he yet 
borrowed in his life and instructions not one trait of the age 
he lived in, or had in himself a single element that was in 
unison with the popular spirit. Equally opposed was Christ 
to the philosophy and practices of the Gentile world. His 
kingdom was not of this earth. He neither asked its favors 
nor feared its frowns. He neither succumbed to the prejudices 
nor trembled beneath the power of the might}^ ; was neither 
seduced by the riches nor dazzled by the honors of the world. 
Solitary, in his own glory did he reveal himself, in his divin- 
ity the most unapproachable, and in his humanity the most 
accessible. Possessing in himself the most diverse qualities, 
he combined the most opposite virtues ; meek and gentle 
beyond conception, yet calm, resolute, and energetic; weep- 
ing at the grave of Lazarus, and rebuking the pride of the 
Pharisees in language never to be surpassed in severity ; 
familiar to little children, and yet making the Jewish San- 
hedrim amazed before the awfulness of his reserve. To him 
the most helpless, the most ignorant and destitute of this 
world's goods, could approach without fear ; and yet the ele- 
ments of nature were all subservient to his word. The 
wisdom of Christ clearly shows him from God. One un- 
guarded expression of veneration to his mother would have 
laid deep in human nature a valid foundation for an idolatry 
the most insidious and powerful, — an idolatry that supports 
the whole system of Romanism, and which needed but a 
word to make it as universal as the Bible itself. But no 
language can portray the inimitable caution of Christ : with 
a divine foresight, he looked through all coming ages, and 
provided an antidote for every spiritual disease of man. 



CHAPTEE III. 

CHRIST AS MORALIST, LEGISLATOR, REDEEMER, AND KING. 

We will consider Christ in those most extraordinary feat- 
ures that make him, in distinction from all human beings, 
the moralist, legislator, redeemer, and king of mankind, and 
which prove him, in connection with miracles and prophecy, 
to be not only the Son of man, but the Son of man in a sense 
essentially different and infinitely superior to that which can 
be predicated of any of Adam's posterity. 

The chapters on miracles and prophecj^, with that upon 
the success of Christianity in tlie first century, enter in as 
conclusive proof of that which Christ says of himself, and 
should be read not onlj^ as connecting links of the great 
chain of evidence showing the Bible from God, but as re- 
vealing with the utmost clearness that Christ is the Alpha 
and Omega of all revelation, the First and Last of all that 
which constitutes redemption for man. 

Never was there an age of the world where morality was 
based upon principles more fundamentally wrong than that 
age in which Christ came. The antediluvian age might in 
the grossness of sin be worse, but certainly the age that wit- 
nessed the advent of Christ to this world excelled in every- 
thing hypocritical and false. The Roman conquests had in- 
troduced outward unity in the political world, and established 
a centralized power that broke down the separating walls 
that in past ages had divided one nation from another ; but 
those conquests were based upon force : fear in the conquered 
nations brought about an external obedience, while at heart 
there was no sympathy or real union. So far as the Roman 
world was concerned, all morality centered in the state and 

(295) 



296 CHRIST AS A MORALIST, 

all virtue was summed up in obedience to Csesar. Political 
idolatry had taken the place of the homage paid in former 
ages to the gods, and heathenism itself had changed its old 
garb for a more liberal superstition, which included in the 
divinities adored, successful generals and emperors. But 
things, if possible, were worse in Judea; for there all the ex- 
clusiveness of Judaism existed, while there was a total de- 
parture from the heroic virtues of the age of Joshua or David, 
or even the later times of the Maccabees. The fire of pure 
devotion had almost gone out upon the sacrificial altar, and 
but a few feeble sparks were seen in those worshipers who 
impatiently looked for the coming of the Messiali. So far 
as morality was concerned, Judea exhibited the spectacle of 
a whitewashed sepulcher, an empty shell, with all that once 
constituted the value of the nut extracted. Society was divided 
into two great classes — gross sinners and plausible moralists. 
The former class knew themselves to be sinners, but cared 
little about leavincr oft' sinnins^, while the latter class felt them- 
selves to be righteous, while practically they were profoundly 
ignorant of the first principles of all virtue, or at heart hostile 
to them. The open sinners and the legalists all agreed in one 
thing, that God in some way should be worshiped, and all 
were pleased with that kind of worship which dispensed with 
the self-sacrificing homage of the soul, while they submitted 
to the outward form of religion. How radically corrupt was 
that state of society when one class practiced that which 
they would not learn, and the other taught that which they 
would not practice ! where conscience was alike defiled 
and unfaithful, and the only religion that prevailed was a 
painted caricature of the true ! What was Judea, morally 
considered, but a monstrous and grotesque exhibition of 
whatever was bigoted, supercilious, and formal ? The 
legalists were looked upon by the multitude as very 
pious. There was the exact washing of cups and platters, 
the precise payment of mint and anise, the most punctual 
observance of fast-days and feast-days ; there were religious 
processions without number, holy banners, sacred badges, 
ecclesiastical intonations, fragrant incense, long faces, and 



LEGISLATOR, B.EDEEMER, AND KING. 297 

sackcloth garments. Xever, probably, did the temple or tlie 
streets witness prayers so long, or manners more exact, or 
religion more vociferous. 

The Scribes and Pharisees were never more pleased than 
when they heard the respectful salutation of Rabbi ! Rabbi! 
And these were the authorized teachers of the people. As 
the author of "Ecce Homo" has well said, " The legalist be- 
lieves that the old method by which their ancestors had 
arrived at a knowledge of the requirements of duty, namely, 
divine inspiration, was no longer available, and that nothing 
more remained but carefully to collect the results at which 
their ancestors had arrived by this method, to adopt their 
results as rules, and to observe them punctiliously. De- 
voutl}^ believing that in the most trifling matter, where 
action was involved, there was a right course and a wrong 
one, and at the same time entirel}^ deserted by the instinct 
or inspiration which distinguishes the one from the other, 
they invented the most frivolous casuistry that has ever been 
known ; they overburdened men's memories and perplexed 
their lives with an endless multitude of rules, which some- 
times were simply trivial ; e.g. an Qg^g laid on a festival 
day may be eaten, according to the school of Shammai ; but 
the school of Hillel says it must not be eaten ; and at other 
times were immoral, as in the case of the Corban, which 
Christ selected for censure." "But it is evident that Christ 
was not better pleased with their good deeds than with their 
bad ones. Their good deeds had the nature of imposture ; 
that is, they did not proceed from the motives' from which 
such deeds naturally spring, and from which the public sup- 
posed them to spring. When these men tithed their property 
for the service of religion, did they do so from the ardent 
feelings which had suggested the oblations of David in old 
times? ITo doubt the people thought so; but in truth they 
paid tithes from a motive which might just as well have 
prompted them to take tithes — respect for a traditional rule. 
When they searched and sifted the Scriptures, fancying, as 
Christ said, that in them they had eternal life, did they do so 
because they felt deeply the wisdom of the old prophets and 



298 CHRIST AS A MORALIST, 

legislators? The people no doubt thought that these dili- 
gent students were possessed with the spirit of what they 
read ; but the truth was that thej only pored over the ancient 
scrolls because they understood that it was proper to read 
ttiem ; therefore the more they read the less they understood. 
And they paid the same reverence to the languid futilities of 
some purblind commentator as to the inspirations of Isaiah. 
When they lauded the ancient prophets, and built their 
sepulchers, was it because they were congenial spirits, formed 
in their school, and bent upon following in their steps? The 
people thought so; but Christ pronounced, with memorable 
point and truth, what is true of many other worshipers of 
antiquity besides the Pharisees, that they were the legitimate 
representatives of those who killed the j^rophets, and that they 
betrayed this by the very worship which they paid to their 
memory." 

Here, then, were two classes Christ had to deal with: the 
people, ignorant, deluded, and vicious; the teachers, proud, 
hypocritical, and false, having just enough of the appearance 
of virtue to escape the consequences of vice, but not enough 
to deliver from its secret power. In both classes morality 
was misunderstood in its great principles, and therefore all 
duty was misdirected or unperformed. But the mischief was 
incalculably greater upon the side of duty, submitted to only 
in its form, than where neither its form nor spirit was carried 
out; for the people were in a condition where they might be 
reached, while the Pharisees were in a state where all reason 
or proof was useless. The mists that hung over the ignorant 
multitude, openly sinning and experiencing the penalties of 
a cost confessed to be alike unclean and undone, might be 
cleared away b}^ the divine teachings of that Saviour who 
healed men in their bodies as in their souls ; but that delusion 
that enchained the privileged order had other and more 
fatal elements of evil than those which characterized the 
people. Pride, with its triple coat of mail, bigotry, ever 
jealous of its prerogatives, and a fanatical regard for those 
forms that brought consideration and wealth, ever stood in 
the way; consequently, of all classes the legahsts were 



LEGISLATOR, REDEEMER, AND KING. 299 

most hostile to Christ; and the reason lay iu the fact that 
Christ not only proved their morality baseless, but took 
away the cloak of hypocrisy by which they deceived the 
people. Now, in all duty, Christ enforced, as never before, 
the value of a right state of heart. All his instructions were 
directed to the great point of personal holiness. There must 
be some principle at the root of all obedience, which makes 
all action right, and without which no word or deed has in it 
that which could commend itself to God. What especially was 
the idea of this principle and its sphere of activity ? It was 
the affections under the law of right — not a theory of right, 
but an impulse of right, a condition where all the sensibili- 
ties are awakened, and all directed in the pure channel of 
holy love. The first principle of morality taught by Christ 
was, that no duty toward God or man could be rightly per- 
formed without the heart. In other words, Christ dwelt upon 
the spirit of obedience rather than form — its internal devel- 
opment rather than its external. But the essence of all duty 
consisted in holy love — its impelling principle must be this, 
because this alone is the only effectual antidote against 
temptation and sin ; but the right action of the sensibilities 
was the last thing thought of by the legalists, and the least 
understood by all classes. Religion had degenerated into 
mere form, and all worship had ceased to have that principle 
that alone could make it pleasing in the sight of God, or 
that spirit without which he could not be approached. Thus 
all duty had become simply an affair of outward action, leav- 
ing the source itself of morality untouched. 

Judaism differed in that age from paganism only in that it 
was more intellectually right. It had lost that element of 
obedience that inspired Abraham, and David, and Isaiah, 
and simply became an affair of punctilious observance, an 
empty routine of tiresome ceremonies. But Christ not only 
pre-eminently taught the right source of all morality, but also 
its right method. This method was singularly comprehensive 
and original. It was peculiarly adapted to the New Dispen- 
sation which he introduced into the world. The nature of 
morality in Judaism was exclusive. It had its animus in the 



300 CHRIST AS A MORALIST, 

stereotyped forms of a Dispensation that was to be super- 
seded by a better. Consequently, Christ taught that our 
neighbor was not the Jew alone, but the Gentile, and that 
mercy and kindness to all men were as imperative as to 
the children of Abraham. Both Jews and Gentiles had no 
true idea of morality toward enemies or aliens. How to act 
under injuries was the most perplexing of all problems to 
solve. But Christ enforced a line of conduct under injury 
absolutely original, if we look to the leaduig authorities 
among both Jews and Gentiles. Thus, among the Romans, 
forgiveness toward enemies, the suppressing of a revenge- 
ful spirit toward conquered foes, hardly entered at all into the 
idea of morality. This was looked upon rather as a vice than 
a virtue, or, if a virtue, something beyond human attainment. 
Among the Jews, if positive enmity did not exist toward 
strangers or Gentiles, positive indiflerence did, and the prin- 
ciple of forgiveness as enforced by Christ toward all man- 
kind was absolutely unknown. This, in practice, was a 
version of the moral law neither felt nor understood. But 
morality, as inculcated by Christ, not only broke down the 
separating wall between Judaism and Gentileism, and made 
all mankind children of one common Father, but, in relation 
to God, the soul, and a future state, principles were taught 
far in advance of anything inculcated in the Old Testament. 
Christ came not onXj to establish the law and the prophets, 
but to give something vastly superior. Thus the Fatherhood 
of God was brought out with wonderful distinctness, and also 
his personal interest in everj^ son and daughter of Adam ; 
not only God under the aspect of reconciliation, but God 
under the aspect of Providence. So, also, of the soul. How 
vivid the light that is flashed upon it by the instructions of 
Christ! How prominently is it brought out in its value and 
amazing interests ! Thus Christ places the seal of royalty 
upon every soul, be the outward condition ever so poor, ob- 
scure, and afflicted : he not only asserts the fact, next to that 
of God's existence, of the utmost importance for man to know 
and feel, but he throws around this fact circumstances of 
worth that never before entered the mind of any person. 



LEGISLATOR, REDEE3IER, AND KING. 301 

So, also, of a future state. Here we see how great the value 
of that kind of morality taught by Christ : happiness or 
misery in the future, the resurrection to life or condemna- 
tion, all have an intimate bearing upon the character of our 
lives and the actual condition of the heart of every person. 
The great thing demanded for heaven was the possession of 
some principle that should be of universal application, and 
yet so simple, so true, so elemental in its nature as to make 
it suitable for every condition of mankind, and perfectly 
adapted to the object of his mission to save the soul. What 
was that principle, lying at the root of all true morality, and 
which, as an indispensable step, secured ultimately a right 
state of heart? One word is enough to express it: faith, or 
confidence. Christ rested everything upon that simple test, 
which alone was possible or practicable for all mankind. 
How was this test enforced ? Simply by saying, If 3'ou have 
confidence in me, you will regard my possession worthy of all 
necessary sacrifice. You will take up your cross for me. 
Thus, morality was based upon the double foundation of 
right faith and right love, faith that should bring this love, 
love that should bring this faith ; both in their very nature 
must lie not upon the surface of humanity, but at the center, 
the heart, and both must exist wherever there was true 
obedience. l!Tow, the diflTerence between the legalists and 
Christ was this : legalists insisted upon forms and rules to 
bring about right morality; Christ, upon faith and love. 
The one was satisfied with the shell of religion, the other 
only with the meat of it. 

Here observe the reason why the legalists were so severely 
censured by Christ, and so openly and frequently rebuked in 
the sternest language. 'Not because they were worse than all 
other classes, — this does not follow necessarily, — but because 
they were vastly more dangerous. With pagans, publicans, 
and open sinners, with the confessedly immoral and disso- 
lute, with all that class excommunicated from the select order 
of pietists or consecrated religionists, and especially such as 
came under the ban of civil law and sufiTered the penalties 
of the outraged sentiments of society, there was an access 



302 CHRIST AS A MORALIST, 

by Christ immensely more easy, and they could be approached 
far more successfully. But between the legalists and Christ 
an irreconcilable hostility, and a barrier immeasurably more 
difficult, existed. The legalists had borrowed enough of the 
garb of true religion to make it plausible with the mul- 
titude, but were utterly destitute of its spirit; they assumed 
to be the teachers of morality, while they were the slaves of 
conventional rules, forms, and ceremonies : moreover, they ex- 
isted as the strongest defenders of an exclusive Judaism. 
But the nature of Christ's mission had superseded this, and 
the end of his advent to this world was to do away with all 
the distinctions of Jew^ and Gentile and upon the wants of a 
common humanity introduce a religion that should be essen- 
tially universal. Consequently, before Christ could proceed 
one step toward establishing Christianil}', he must destroy 
the whole system of legalism in the estimation of the people, 
aud bring into deserved contempt the hypocritical teachers 
of it. 

A new era had dawned upon the world, but the Scribes 
and Pharisees had shut their eyes to the miracles of our 
Saviour, or had willfully perverted them into the workings of 
Beelzebub, and, while they borrowed all that was burdensome 
and formal in the religion of the prophets, they were utterly 
destitute of their spirit. They had simply floated like chips 
upon the sea of humanity, and like chips they had been 
thrown upon the beach, useless for all purposes conducive to 
human welftire. Contenting themselves with being mere 
surface-teachers, they grew worse and worse, until they had 
arrived at just that point where in honest morality they were 
worse than the people, while in pretension they assumed to 
be immeasurably better. Christ could not tolerate them 
without sacrificing that cause for which he was willing to 
suffer and to die. 

Consider Christ as a legislator. Moses was the legislator 
of a nation, Christ of the world. The genius of the one was 
exclusive, that of the other universal. Moses' legislation was 
restricted to the ceremonial law and the ten commandments, 
Christ's legislation embodied the spirit of all right law, while 



LEGISLATOR, REDEEMER, AND KING. 303 

he did away with all burdensome forms and all ceremonies 
that could not assume a world-wide adaptation. Of outward 
observances Christ restricted himself to three — open profes- 
sion with his visible church, baptism, and the sacrament of 
the Lord's Supper ; but, strictly speaking, the last two were 
only enjoined, for they included the first. ^N'ow, the legislation 
of Christ differed essentially from that of Moses in that it not 
only had a world-wide adaptation, but it had a vastly more 
positive character. Its spirit was essentially aggressive and 
comprehensive. The morality of the former consisted more 
in not doing evil — J'Aoi^s/ia^^^^o^, was the animus of it, — while 
the morality of Christ consisted in doing good, and its watch- 
word was, Thou shall 

For motives Moses relied more on temporal rewards and 
punishments, but Christ on eternal. The one appealed to 
the present, the other to the future. The legislation of 
Moses was adapted to a specific end, that of Christ to a 
general end. Thus, while the legislation of Moses may be 
compared to a river flowing on in a prescribed channel, 
,that of Christ could only be likened to the ocean washing 
great continents and fit for the commerce of the world. 
Notice the address of Christ to the Samaritan woman at the 
well of water : " But the hour cometh, and now is, when the 
true worshipers shall worship the Father in spirit and in 
truth; for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is 
a Spirit, and they that worship him must worship him in 
spirit and in truth." 

Kow the legislation of Christ was exactly of that charac- 
ter that made him a law to all his true disciples. The prin- 
ciple simply consisted in holding up an idea of excellence in 
his own person and instructions so perfect that nothing could 
be added to it, and nothing, without loss, taken from it. 
This ideal, if not attainable in this world, was ever to be 
reached after, and in itself was the most effectual antidote 
for sin. The legislation of Moses threw a man more upon 
his own resources, while that of Christ aimed constantly to 
throw a person upon the resources of God. By proposing a 
perfect standard, it taught most clearly human dependence 



304 CHRIST AS A MORALIST, 

and divine strength, and thns, while it developed humility, 
it at the same time inspired the noblest courage. The 
legislation of Christ carried with it far more effectual power 
to restrain from sin than that of Moses, because, while that of 
Moses had more reference to the outward act, Christ's legis- 
lation had peculiar relation to the disposition. As sin has 
its source in the disposition, so, to cure man of sin, Christ 
taught that the root of it existing in the heart must be ex- 
tracted. All then of Christ's legislation went directly to the 
source of all mischief, either in the individual or the commu- 
nity, and taught the one great lesson that the same principle 
that made a man right with God would lead him to be right 
with his neighbor, and that wherever there was the true love 
of the one, there also would be the true love of the other. 

Equally different in tlie legislation of Moses and of Christ 
were the motives to obedience presented by each. The 
present world, with the one, was the great motive power, 
with its rewards and punishments, while the future world 
was that most constantly appealed unto by Christ. It there- 
fore followed that where faith existed there also a motive 
power must exist, as superior in reality as the future life is 
more important than the present. Besides, the very mission 
of Christ demanded a more vivid presentation of the future 
world ; and thus, when the time came for a higher revelation, 
we see that it was given under just those circumstances that 
made it a wonderful power in making progressive the re- 
ligion of Christ. Thus the whole condition of humanity was 
changed, or vitally affected, by the greater truths communi- 
cated of the life beyond the grave. These truths had 
in them that which had an especial bearing upon the 
soul. Christ, as a legislator, brought to bear upon obe- 
dience all the motive power of three worlds. It was, then, 
not only as a moralist that he spoke, but as a legislator he 
enacted ; and while he borrowed all that was useful of that 
old dispensation, he engrafted principles and motives into the 
new that made it peculiarly his own. In all the civil and 
social relations of life, Christ's legislation was just that which 
made it adapted to all ages and countries. It studiously 



LEGISLATOR, REDEEMER, AND KIXG. 305 

avoided having anything to do with the civil power, or with 
the merely outward relations of society, or with any mere 
social organization. The supreme wisdom of this will be seen 
when we reflect that society was immeasurably more cor- 
rupt in its spirit than in its forms, and, in the nature of things, 
must go through with endless outward changes to be made 
essentially better. Christ therefore shunned, in his legislation 
to his disciples, the least approximation to any one form or 
organization of society. He recognized most clearly the 
divine authority in the abstract of all civil government, but 
he would not be a partisan of any. Thus all of Christ's legis- 
lation was to effect a change in the outward relations of 
society, by going directly to the heart of it and creating a 
right spirit in the individual, and, through the individual, in 
the community. The spirit right, and, by an irresistible 
law of moral gravitation, the forms in time would be right; 
while the spirit wrong, and all forms would be perverted, and 
degenerate into some kind or other of civil or social despot- 
ism. And the course of Christ's legislation was pre-eminently 
adapted to the age in which he lived. Xo age excelled it in 
forms and ceremonies, and none came up to it in a radically 
corrupt and bad spirit. Society was rotten at its very core, 
and the first thing to be done was to apply a remedy to the 
inmost seat of the disease. Xow, the legalists were content 
with painting over this sepulcher of humanity ; Christ only 
with raising the dead bodies in it. Consequently, in the 
memorable instance of the tribute-money, the woman taken 
in adultery, and the course taken by Jesus at Pilate's Hall, 
we see how careful Christ was to abstain from any appear- 
ance of interfering with the civil relations of society. So 
in the ecclesiastical and social relations of society, Christ 
freely mingled with all classes, and indorsed by his presence 
all those outward forms by which the machinery of society 
moved on ; and yet his legislation was peculiarly adapted, by 
introducing a new spirit, to work ultimately a change in the 
form itself. Remember, our Saviour made laws for his church 
and the world, and not for a sect or a nation; he inculcated 
those principles of love to God and man that, in their secret 

20 



306 CHRIST AS A MORALIST, 

and powerful movement in the heart of society, would in time 
bring about the highest moral, civil, and social elevation of 
man, and ultimately create those right forms and rules that 
would secure the noblest welfare of man ; but Christ com- 
menced with the root of society, and not its branches, knowing 
full well that unless the spirit was made right, all its outward 
developments must be wrong. 

Let us now consider Christ as the Redeemer of maiji. Here 
we see, as has been shown in the chapter upon the gospel solu- 
tion to the question of the sinner saved and the law sustained, 
that Christ alone met the conditions of this most perplexing of 
all problems. But there is an aspect to the subject of Christ 
the Redeemer of man worthy of careful consideration; that is, 
the great necessity of man was twofold, — a vicarious sacrifice, 
and a perfect example. This involved the incarnation of 
Christ, and a sensible and perfect illustration of all virtue ; 
virtue not alone in the abstract, but the concrete; virtue 
under all those conditions made essential for redemption. 
Xow, however unnecessary skeptics of the present day may 
deem the incarnation and death of Christ, yet we cannot 
study the systems of religion in the ancient world without 
being impressed with the idea that there ran through all 
pagan idolatry that which told of an earnest longing for 
some sensible manifestation of Uod, and especially that 
which should show a way of deliverance from sin. 

In our chapter upon the necessity of a revelation from God, 
it will be seen how earnest the longing for some manifestation 
of God that had been for ages withheld from the world. 
l!^or does it change the fact of this longing that the imagin- 
ation had invented innumerable methods of divine mani- 
festation that were opposed to all true reason and good 
judgment. Awfully depraved as were those inventions by 
which God was brought into communication with man, yet 
those incarnations that embodied the idea of present divin- 
ities, however monstrous in their conception, truly told of a 
want that had showed itself from the earliest ages of the world. 
Now we say that the incarnation of Christ precisely met this 
want, while it eliminated from it everything that was im- 



LEGISLATOR, REDEEMER, AND KING. 307 

pure and unreasonable. The fact that Christ in a vicarious 
sense was the Redeemer of man, as well as his Redeemer by his 
holy example, and that both his sacrifice and his life were di- 
vine, is the one great miracle of miracles, the central fact of all 
facts, and the only thing that promised to solve the difficul- 
ties of man's existence in the world. It is impossible to hold 
converse with the philosophy of paganism, and study the 
writings of Homer, Plato, Socrates, Cicero, or Yirgil, with- 
out finding that which told of the evil of sin, and that which 
manifested an earnest desire to know some way by which 
man might be delivered from the bondage that enthralled 
him. 

Thus, Young, in his work upon the " Christ of History," 
has well remarked: " We cannot hope to discover, in the re- 
ligions of mankind, the method of solving the deepest 
problem of Christianity, but it is quite possible that they may 
illustrate, perhaps confirm, the only satisfactory solution which 
has yet been suggested. In these religions, almost without 
exception, the idea of incarnation will be found under one 
form or another. It is related, that Paul and Barnabas, in 
the city of Lystra, were about to receive divine honors ; Bar- 
nabas was to be worshiped as an incarnation of Jupiter, and 
Paul as an incarnation of Mercury. The people of Laconia 
cried, ' The gods have come down to us in the likeness of 
men.' The noticeable fact is, that this was not a new and 
strange thought to them, but an opportunity familiar and 
generally received, and which, therefore, at once occurred to 
them as aftbrding an easy interpretation of what they had 
seen and heard in connection with the two foreigners. The 
numberless metamorphoses of the gods of ancient Greece 
and Rome, and in the Eastern world the incarnations of 
Brahm, the avatars of Vishnu, and the human form of 
Kreeshna, and its reappearance in successive ages, are signifi- 
cant and demonstrative on this subject. Among almost all 
nations, and from the earliest period of which any authentic 
record has been preserved down to our own times, the idea of 
God incarnating himself is found. But mankind do not 
universally and for successive ages adopt that which is loholly 



308 CHRIST AS A MORALIST, 

false. On tlie most pliilosopliical grounds it may be argued 
that the continued and wide acceptance of the notion of in- 
carnation in the world, is decisive proof that it must have 
some basis of truth. The idea, indeed, if admitted by men at 
all, Avas manifestl}' for conscience and reason in their most 
reverent and subdued exercise, and not for imagination. It 
was too awfully sacred for imagination, even in its most 
chastened movements, to have approached. But imagina- 
tion, unchastened, irreverent, impure, coarse, and wild, dared 
to violate this sanctity. The result we behold in the con- 
tradictions, absurdities, blasphemies, and ofienses against 
all faith and religious feeling and taste of which the world 
is full." 

"But, in spite of the humiliations and revolting facts of this 
kind which abound, it may be argued incontrovertibly that 
the idea itself of incarnation must, from its universality, have 
some basis of truth. One of two things, or both, ma}^ be legiti- 
mately presumed : either this idea is the traditionary vestige 
of some primitive revelation, or there must be some grand 
necessity of universal human nature which it is felt can be 
met only by the doctrine of incarnation in one form or other. 
The deep sense of such a necessity all nations and all times 
have proclaimed ; and does not Christianitj^ reveal the only 
actual provision which has been made to meet this universal 
want ? It was a promise in the beginning, it was a hope 
and a faith in successive ages, and in the fullness of the times 
the promise was fulfilled, the faith and the hope were realized. 
Once for all a response worthy of God was given to the cry 
of humanity; once for all, to meet a grand necessity, to 
achieve what no otherwise could have been achieved for the 
redemption of man, God incarnated himself. The union of 
divinity with humanity is the only principle which harmo- 
nizes the outward facts and the moral aspects of the life of 
Jesus Christ. Disgusted with the absurdities and shocked 
by the impurities and impieties of mythological incarna- 
tions, conscience and reason find rest in one incarnation for 
all time.'' 

"In the personal character of Christ, then, we have the 



LEGISLATOR, REDEEMER, AND KING. 309 

evidence not o\i\y of a higher ojfice, but of a higher nature^ than 
ever belonged to man ; the evidence of an essential constitu- 
tional separation from all men, in him who was holy, harm- 
less, undefiled, and separate from sinners ; in Jesus, the Son 
of Mary, the Avords of the ancient oracle received their beauti- 
ful fulfillment : ' Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is 
given ; and the government shall be upon his shoulders ; 
and his name shall be called ^Yonderful, Counselor, the 
Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace.' " — 
Isaiah, ix. 6. 

The great central fact of all revelation is, that Christ is the 
Redeemer. In its comprehensive import it embodies, as has 
been seen, two essential ideas — first, Christ a perfect exam- 
ple ; secondly, Christ a perfect sacrifice. Consequently, 
while the incarnation of the Son of God is in itself the 
profoundest of m^^steries, it yet offers the only solution 
to the question involved in the reconciliation of man to 
God, and presents the only valid foundation for reason to 
build upon or faith to inspire to virtue. But the incarna- 
tion of Christ was the necessary condition of his expiation 
for sin, just as his perfect sacrifice is the onl}' foundation 
for redemption. 

Let us now view Christ under the aspect of a king. Here 
observe, kingship may or does have two spheres of existence 
— one exclusively of this world, the other of the next; one 
temporal, the other spiritual ; one limited only to time, the 
other bounded only by eternity. Observe, then, that at the 
very commencement of Christ's ministrj^ our Saviour studi- 
ously avoided the former kingship, and this resolution on 
many occasions flashed out with peculiar power, ^ot o\i\y 
did Christ not seek temporal power, wealth, fame, or influ- 
ence, he upon every occasion avoided it. The precise diffi- 
culty with the Jews was simply that Christ would not assume 
worldly kingship. It mortified their pride, repelled their 
hopes, irritated beyond measure all their national vanity, to 
see Christ performing the works of a prophet of God, and 
yet avoiding and contemning that earthly position which the 
Jews reasonably thought he should take. Thus, we read, the 



310 CHRIST AS A MORALIST, 

multitude sought to make Christ a king, but he would not 
be induced thus to be made their earthly master. 

Christ disclaimed all pretensions of a worldly nature ; he 
forbade his disciples to harbor the thought even that his king- 
dom was of this world, and to the Jews this was peculiarly 
vexatious. With ample credentials to place him in the high- 
est earthly position, he yet promised his disciples only the 
contempt and persecution of the world. Xow this attitude 
upon the part of Christ was the real cause of his rejection 
by the Jews. What they looked for was an earthly king; 
what they desired was one who would lead them on to vic- 
tory and make the Roman nation let go its grasp upon their 
national life. A king was the ver}^ thing they dreamed of 
and most earnestly prayed for; it formed the absorbing sub- 
ject of their thoughts, and was that which they expected the 
Messiah to be. And Christ boldly told the Jews he w^as a 
king; he asserted this before the judgment-seat of Pilate; 
he proclaimed it wherever he went ; he died with his king- 
ship prominent in his words and actions. But Christ, to be 
consistently a Redeemer, must be only a spiritual king; 
and no other kingship was in harmony w^ith the great end 
of an atonement ; and this spiritual kingship carried with 
it the two greatest of all attributes, — universality and eter- 
nity. It was a kingship for all ages, and a kingship for 
all conditions and races of men. It was world-wide and 
unending. 

Such a kingship was of necessity spiritual, and demanded 
of all its subjects faith and love. Consequently, it was more 
far-reaching m its claims and ends as the obedience of the 
spirit, its affection and confidence, are infinitely superior to 
outward obedience, or submission to visible and worldly 
power. The kingship of Christ was of just that character 
that made it singularly appropriate to the object of his mis- 
sion and the benefit of man. Christ did not seek any other 
influence over his disciples than that which proceeded from 
the voluntary homage of the heart and was the free expres- 
sion of affection and confidence. Consequently, the kingdom 
of Christ differed altogether in the nature of the power em- 



LEGISLATOR, REDEEMER, AND KING. 311 

ployed from that of earthly kingdoms, which was simply the 
law of force^ or the authority of the sword. This was the 
glory of Eome, of her Caesars and her Herods and Pilates ; 
but the law of love was the propelling influence of Christ's 
kingdom. Its throne was in the spiritual nature of man, 
that comprehended the conscience, reason, and affection; con- 
sequently, in all the civil relations of life, Christ uniformly 
abstained from any acts or words that would make him a 
party to any civil authorit3\ He inculcated submission and 
obedience, w^hile he would not be made a judge to indorse 
any party whatever in authority. 

Thus, in the tribute-money, Christ laid down a rule of 
universal application, while with infinite wisdom he confined 
himself alone to that kingship which was spiritual. l!Tor was 
it possible, for the end in view, that Christ should combine 
temporal and spiritual power, an earthly and a heavenly khig- 
ship; both must be kept distinct, for any alliance with the 
kingdoms of the world would be fatal to his great end of re- 
demption from sin. This was chief in all the thoughts of 
Christ, and therefore his kingship must have enstamped upon 
it universality and eternity, and that only was consistent 
with its spirituality. But there was a sense where the con- 
dition of redemption was changed, when the cure of sin 
working inwardly had extended to that which was outward 
and bodily, where with the highest truth it may be said that 
the kingdom of Christ was sensible, visible, and of the 
world to come. Christ uniformly taught that he was not 
only a spiritual king, claiming the deepest homage of the 
heart, demanding obedience in all relations of life, and im- 
posing sanctions that embraced three worlds, but that when 
the set time should come, that kingship would assume an out- 
ward and visible form, as in this life it was strictly spiritual 
and had its sway over onl}^ the mind and heart. Repeat- 
edly did Christ take upon himself that which most signifi- 
cantly told of his royal authority; but he also declared that 
the time would come when his kingship should be as sensi- 
ble and visible as it had been spiritual, and that as truly 
would he be outwardly a king as then he Avas spiritually 



312 CHRIST AS A MORALIST, 

unknown and unrecognized, except by those who in their 
hearts submitted to his divine authority ; and the reason Lay 
in the fact, that as the cure of sin was to commence inwardly 
and work outwardly, so also should Christ's reign correspond 
with the exact progress of redemption from its imperfect to 
its perfected condition. 

Thus it will be seen that a true idea of the kingship of 
Christ is the very key-note to the understanding of his in- 
structions to his disciples and his mission to save sinners. 
It has been seen that Christ had one great end in view, that 
absorbed all his thoughts and inspired to all his sacrifices 
That end was redemption, — first of the soul, then of the body. 
Xow, the assumption of an outward and earthly kingship 
would have defeated this end when our Saviour came into 
the world. It would, indeed, have exactly corresponded with 
the views and feelings of the Jews, but it would also have 
extinguished all those hopes built upon the universality and 
spirituality of his kingdom. Christ aimed in every way to 
disappoint and thwart the contracted and selfish views held 
of his kingship by the Jews. To gratify them was to sacri- 
fice his mission. Consequently, our Redeemer studiously 
avoided all that favored the expectations of his countrymen. 
His mission was not for a nation, but for the world; and, 
therefore, the spirituality rather than the visible or outward 
manifestation of his kingdom was chiefly aimed at. What 
Christ sought after was, to convince all that an atonement 
for sin was inconsistent with worldly kingship ; for redemp- 
tion not only involved a cross upon the part of Christ, but 
also self-sacrifice upon that of his disciples. How incon- 
gruous with this, any other position than that which Christ 
actually took ! 

It will, therefore, be seen that the mission of Christ was 
peculiarly spiritual, even as sacrificial, and aimed at nothing 
less than making practicable and universal a way of recon- 
ciliation with God, and the very reason that led the Jews 
to reject Christ was the highest reason, rightly considered, 
for receiving him. The difi&culty with the Jew was, that 
in interpreting the prophets no true distinction was made 



LEGISLATOR, REDEEMER, AND KING. 313 

between the lirst and the second coming of Christ ; but the 
Old, even as the I^ew Testament, made a world-wide differ- 
ence in these two great and most momentous events. The 
first coming of Christ must, of necessity, be that of humilia- 
tion, while his second coming had only the marks of regal 
triumph and supremacy. Christ's first coming was more to 
secure the great end of a perfect priesthood, while his second 
coming involved especially the idea of a perfect kingship; and 
yet the kingdom of Christ was as real in his first as it will be 
in his second coming, only it will then be both spiritual and 
visible and possess all those characteristics that will adapt it 
for a sphere of existence altogether difi'erent. Consequently, 
we see the consummate wisdom Christ alwaj-s displayed 
when the subject of his kingship was alluded to. 

In this world everything earthly and sensual was elimi- 
nated from it, because it was not of this earth ; it coveted 
neither its favors nor trembled beneath its frowns ; it bor- 
rowed not one feature in common with the kingdoms of this 
life; it presented a marked contrast to everything that 
attracted the admiration and love of worldly characters, and 
sought only to reveal itself as spiritual and universal. The 
very comprehensiveness of the spirit embodied in it was fatal 
to the hopes of the Jews ; and, while they aimed only to secure 
that which was national, Christ thought only of that which 
was desi2:ned for all men and all ao;es. And here notice a most 
singular and extraordinary evidence of the divine character of 
our Saviour's mission : it was not onl}' absolutely original in 
its conception, but in its execution. It borrowed nothing of 
the age he lived in, it appealed to none of the hopes common 
to mankind, it resorted to none of those measures essential 
for securing the prizes of earth. We find nothing in the life 
or instructions of Christ that would give the least idea of 
being a copy from any human original. Christ was his own 
original. Nothing like him ever before appeared on this 
earth, and nothing in all subsequent ages has ever assumed 
the lineaments of his person. And the distinguishing pecu- 
liarity of the life of Christ consisted in his reserve both of 
power and knowledge. It was this that filled his disciples 



314 CHRIST AS A MORALIST, ETC. 

with such admiration and awe. They saw Christ giving at 
times, for most beneficent ends, the most amazing evidence of 
power, and, yet while subject to the wants of humanity, taking 
nothing for himself; ever willing to do good to others, but 
never solicitous to appropriate even needful comforts for his 
own person. He walked the ground a living embodiment of 
all that was unsellish and generous. The Lamb of God was 
the appropriate designation of his character. In that form of 
diviuest workmanship there were stores of inexhaustible 
knowledge, even as power. And yet the reticence of Christ 
was quite as extraordinary as his hours of instruction. Our 
Saviour never deviated from one great end, even that of the 
redemption of body and soul, and his kingship in the age of 
his lirst advent Avas just that which corresponded to the 
actual wants of the world. A kingdom of love, as distin- 
guished from a kingdom of force, was the leading feature of 
Christ's spiritual reign, and in the very principles which 
marked its development and the moral triumphs which 
followed in its progress there was revealed an infinite supe- 
riority to all the kingdoms of this earth. 



CHAPTER lY. 



EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES. 



We define a miracle to be a visible sign given directly and in- 
telligenthj to yuan from God, to shoiv the suspension of a law of 
nature, or that God has interposed his power to control the 
established course of nature. We consider miracles that 
are real as strictly supernatural, or something above human 
or angelic power, but we do not mean to comprehend in 
miracles all signs, or wonders, or that even which is not hu- 
man. We w^ould not call the agency of good or bad angels 
miraculous, although superhuman. !N'or do we mean to say 
that there may be no cases on record where God permits 
things to be done which maj^ not have very much the appear- 
ance of miracles; but what we do mean to say is, that when 
God works miracles they are so clearly defined, thej- come 
under such circumstances and for such occasions, that show 
them distinctly to be from him, and not from any creature 
source. 

We do not purpose so much to investigate what may be 
miraculous, or what is the extent of miracles, as to confine 
our remarks to that which all must admit to proceed from a 
visible interposition of God, of such a nature as to be impos- 
sible to be performed by any creature, or to take place ac- 
cording to the known course of nature. 

The question now is, Is there any probability that God 
would work miracles to substantiate a revelation of his will ? 
We reply, that it is in the highest degree probable that God 
would give such credentials to his wall. Consider the end 
to be attained unto. The infinite Being who holds all natural 
law in his hands, can, whenever he sees fit, either break in 
upon their uniformity, or so control them, or introduce in 
coimection with them other laws, as to secure the great re- 

(315) 



316 EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES. 

suit of miracle, so sensible as to strike conviction of their 
divine origin in the dullest minds. The simple question to 
consider is, Does not the Bible, revealing Christ the Saviour 
of sinners, a future state of rewards and punishments, the 
judgment and the resurrection, need miracles as suitable 
credentials with mankind? The question is not whether 
there is evidence enough without miracles to authorize us to 
believe and obey the Bible, but whether, constituted as men 
are, without miracles the Bible would be believed in, or be 
received as from God. What men should do, and what they 
will do, are two questions altogether different. How could 
Christ prove, without miracles, to the Jews his divine mis- 
sion ? How, without miracles, in the early days of Chris- 
tianity, could it have made way against the opposition and 
unbelief of the world ? How could Moses have delivered 
from Egypt the Israelites, without the miraculous interposi- 
tion of God? But more than this, the Bible comes tons 
denouncing the severest punishment to those who reject it 
and do not in their hearts receive the great author of Chris- 
tianity. Why such severity of punishment, if so important 
and conclusive credentials as miracles are not given ? 

Christ even rested also his claims as the Son of God upon 
miracles. He openly said that he was not to be believed in 
unless he did the works that no other man could do, works 
above all human or angelic power, works that God only 
could perform, who alone controls nature's laws, and can break 
in upon their undeviating uniformity. Considering the 
greatness of the end to be accomplished, considering that 
the very existence of Christianity depended upon miracles, 
is it not highly probable that God would work them ? Con- 
sider the adaptation of the Bible to our wants : why then 
should we not have the royal seal of its divine origin ? Here 
is a watch : it is well made, every wheel is in its place, every 
part is^ adjusted to its separate office, nothing is absent but 
the hands to point out the minutes and the hours: why 
should not those hands be given to the watch ? They go to 
complete one great design : why not given ? 
. I^ow, here is a revelation of a great system of redemption 



EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES. 317 

perfectly adapted to all our wants, but it needs credentials 
that it has come from God, credentials of such a nature that 
if imnting, millions who receive the Bible as divine would 
reject to their ruin. Admitting the existence of an infinitely 
powerful, wise, and good God, is it not in the highest degree 
probable they would be given ? God is able to work mira- 
cles ; there is then no want of power thus to do. God is in- 
linitely wise to secure the great end of redemption ; there is, 
then, every probability upon the side of wisdom that mira- 
cles would be worked. God is as good as he is powerful and 
wise ; there is, then, in his mercy, the strongest presump- 
tion that there will be miracles. 

But Christ, professing himself to be from God, and God 
manifest in the flesh, repeatedly declaring his mission divine, 
proposing to himself the amazing end of the redemption of 
the soul forever and the salvation of the world, of necessity 
based the great evidence of his supernatural advent to this 
earth upon miracles; he boldly asserted that if he did not 
the works that no man could do, then he was not entitled to 
belief, while he denounced the severest condemnation upon 
those who would not believe upon him, simply because they 
refused to credit that which could not with reason be denied. 
]^ow, the whole mission of Christ, the age in which he ap- 
peared, the violent enemies encountered, and all the obsta- 
cles so formidable to be mastered, made miracles of the 
utmost importance to the success of Christianity: is it not 
most reasonable to suppose that such credentials would be 
granted by an all-powerful, wise, and merciful God ? 

The great reason why many reject miracles arises from 
two errors: first, overlooking the fact of a personal God of 
infinite freedom and power, holding all laws in complete sub- 
jection to his w^ill, the absolute originator of all existence, 
and its laws, material and immaterial ; and then in believing 
in no other laws but the laws of nature, and the eternity of 
their duration, even as undeviating uniformity. Conse- 
quently, when miracle is spoken of, they say. Will God vio- 
late his own laws, will he act against nature, will he ordain 
a method of operation in nature, and yet counteract it ? 



318 EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES. 

But all this reasoning springs from a false view of nature. 
IN'ature is made for a certain end; but suppose a higher end 
is to be secured, will nature, by its uniformity of laws imiii- 
terrupted, be permitted by God to defeat this end ? Will God 
be so dependent upon his own workmanship as not to show 
to his creatures his superiority to it ? 

As theists, we cannot limit God to the exclusive sphere of 
his natural laws. God must have a sphere of action above 
those laws, and able, whenever some great and wise end is 
to be secured, to take away the veil of nature, remove the 
thick folds of its garment, and show visibly and nakedly, 
without any obstructing medium, the glittering sign of his 
awful presence. But more than this : we contend that if 
miracles are not in accordance with the existino^ laws of na- 
ture, they may be in perfect harmony with other laws. If 
God suspends one kind of law, it may be to introduce another 
and superior kind of law; and if creating power has existed 
in the past ages of the world, and does now, and will ever, 
exist with God, then certainly it is most absurd to say that 
the Almighty has not controlling, suspending, regulating, 
or counteracting power. If God can make a world, he can 
make it move as he pleases. 

Did the Bible contain idle fables, absurd contradictions, 
immoral instructions; did it approve of theft, profanity, 
avarice, pride, deceit, impurity, murder; was its general 
scope in favor of selfishness, or parental or civil disobedi- 
ence, a disposition lawless of human or divine restraints, 
such a Bible would have an internal evidence that it was not 
from God, that would, in the highest degree, make miracles 
in its confirmation improbable, and even impossible. But 
from an examination of the general scope of the Bible, and 
its adaptation to elevate and bless man, we find directly the 
reverse. Such being the case, with a revelation worthy of mir- 
acles, and needing miracles to make it to be received, where 
the slightest improbability of miracles ? Where is there the 
least evidence, from the uniformity of nature's laws, that mir- 
acles would not be given, considering the end to be attained? 

Let it be remembered we are arguing as theists, not 



EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES. 319 

atheists. We believe in a personal God infinitely higher 
than natural law, in his power able to work miracles, and 
from his wisdom and goodness disposed thus to do, provided 
there is an end to be attained unto worth}- of the breaking in 
upon the uniformity of natural law. Christianity presents 
itself as such an end. Everything depends, in its reception, 
upon miracles. There are the mightiest obstacles to be over- 
come, the most formidable corruption of human nature and 
the world. Where, then, the improbability that God's am- 
bassador to this earth should bring the roj'al seal of his 
divine commission ? Is there not, then, the highest moral 
certainty that if such an ambassador does come to man, he 
will have the seal of heaven to make evident his divine 
origin ? 

There can, then, be no presumptive evidence against the 
miracles of Christianity simply from the uniformity of 
natural law? This uniformity is the very thing that consti- 
tutes the idea of a miracle Were this uniformity broken in 
upon every day miracles would become common events, and 
lose all their value; but worse than this, all certainty, and 
all the plain rules of living and thinking, would be deranged, 
natural law would lose all its importance, and confusion reign 
triumphant. God, who does nothing without a wise end, 
has made, therefore, miracles of rare occurrence, and only at 
great epochs of time and emergency of events. Miracles are 
the reverse movement of the great engine of God's provi- 
dence. They constitute an indispensable check to natural 
law. They mark the signal sovereignty of God over law, 
and reveal a far grander power behind the mighty machinery 
of the universe, by which God, at fit times, interposes to ac- 
complish his vast purposes of wisdom. 

While, therefore, under common circumstances and on or- 
dinary occasions miracles are the most improbable of events, 
and ought not to be believed in, yet, in extraordinary emer- 
gencies, when certain occasions of vast moment transpire, 
they are of all things the most probable. Thus, we find, with 
the great multitude of Christians, the strongest proof of the 
validity of miracles consists in the adaptation of the Bible to 



320 EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES. 

their wants ; and because of their absolute necessity to sub- 
stantiate the divine mission of Christ a supernatural revela- 
tion must have a supernatural proof. Christ, if true in his 
words, must be true in his works. If his veracity is to be 
believed in, then the miraculous evidence of that veracity 
must be credited. Miracles are to be believed, not only 
upon the ground that a most wise and beneficent end was 
secured by them, but because the truthfulness of Chris- 
tianity hangs upon them. 

The ethics of the Bible all depend upon its proofs, and its 
proofs upon its ethics. The supernatural is the foundation 
upon which the whole system of redemption rests. 

How certain, then, that God will work miracles when some 
great end is to be attained by them ; some end honorable to 
God, and in harmony with the noblest interests of man. This 
is not only theologically true, but true also to science. We 
assert that whatever science does say upon miraculous inter- 
positions at great epochs of time is all upon the side of reve- 
lation, and corresponds altogether with the view, that 
whenever some might}^ end was to be attained unto that 
natural law could not reach, that end Avas consummated by 
miracles, by the setting aside of natural law, or by the direct 
interposition of God. Thus, in the solid stratas of the earth 
are piled, with the regularity of shelves in a book-case, im- 
mense masses of different orders of animals, commencing with 
the inferior type of animal organization and going up to the 
highest rank of creatures below man, reptiles, fishes, birds, 
and quadrupeds. This earth shows unmistakable evidence 
of the, uniformity of natural law being broken in upon, that 
there were epochs of time when changes took place that 
can be accounted for by no system of gradual development 
according to law, but only by a sudden, direct, and violent 
interruption of law and miraculous interposition of God. 

But we have an additional evidence from reason to believe 
that natural law may be suspended and miracle intervene. 
Suppose natural law either could not, or would not, in its 
uniformity, at any time be suspended; suppose its course 
was so undeviating that no end to be accomplished, however 



EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES. 321 

worthy, would avail to have it suspended, — where the visi- 
ble evidence to man of the sovereignty of God over matter ? 
But worse than this ; would not law be deified at the expeuse 
of God ? Would not God be forever forgotten by sinners 
when they never saw nature's uniformity broken in upon? 
Here it is that miracles, under some circumstances, are so 
necessary and so probable. Here it is that we find God 
teaching man lessons alike of his omnipotence and his 
wisdom. We come, then, to the conclusion, that so exalted 
is the end Christianity is designed to subserve, so worthy the 
object that it aims to secure, that miracles are not only in 
the highest degree probable, but necessary. 

Upon what ground are we then to belieye that miracles by 
God have been worked to give credit to the claims of revela- 
tion ? There are but two possible grounds, — that of sight, of 
actual observation ourselves, and that of the testimony of 
others. But it is more than eighteen hundred years since 
Christ died : more than three thousand years since the won- 
ders of Egypt and the giving the law upon Sinai: more 
than four thousand years since the flood. Upon what ground, 
but that of testimony, can we believe in these miracles ? 
Personal observation of these miracles, to us, is out of the 
question. In what way can we believe in them, if not by 
testimony? There are those who have said, "We will not 
believe a miracle unless we can see it." A French infidel 
once said, " Why does not God show an evidence of mira- 
cles by writing his name upon the sky ?" Suppose God 
should do just what the folly of some would have him do, 
work miracles every day and before all mankind for their 
convenience : what would be the result ? First, there being 
only the unworthy end to accomplish of gratifying an idle 
curiosity, the highest evidence of the genuineness of Bible 
miracles would be taken away ; and secondly, these events so 
common would interrupt all the harmon}^ of natural laws 
and break up the whole system of nature's uniformity. Con- 
fusion would take the place of order, and uncertainty derange 
all human foresight. Who would travel, if the certainty was 
as great of going backward as forward ? Who would eat, if 

21 



322 EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES. 

there was a probability as strong of starving on food as re- 
ceiving benefit from it ? Is it not most unreasonable, then, 
to demand of God miracles, when there is neither a worthy 
end to be reached, nor benefit secured ? 

"When it can be shown that natural law is unable to secure 
the end that miracle does, that some great epoch in human 
history has come making necessary the interposition of God, 
when it can be shown that nature is utterly helpless to secure 
the noblest welfare of man, and that the highest moral con- 
siderations demand the manifestation oi the supernatural, 
then the evidence of testimony is of the greatest value. A 
celebrated infidel, of more acuteness than wit, and more 
sophistry than wiidom, had the presumption in an essa}' 
upon miracles to say that " no amount of testimony could 
prove the miracles of the Bible, — that experience was greater 
against them than for them." Upon the atheist's ground, or 
that of the pantheist, that there is no God in distinction from 
his works, no independent Being infinitely above and separate 
from nature, or that nature itself is God, the opponents of 
Hume could not fairly reply to his arguments ; he might well 
say that the experience of man in the uniformity of natural law 
should outweigh all evidence to the contrary. But there was 
another ground, where a child might contend with the 
greatest of skeptics and come ofi' a victor, — it was that of 
theism, — the existence of a personal God superior to all law ; 
one who had the power to interrupt his laws, or suspend 
them, or to introduce other and higher laws, and the wisdom 
thus to do whenever some worthy and glorious end was to 
be subserved by thus acting. All argument is thrown away 
with a man upon miracles who does not recognize and feel 
the reality of an infinitely wise, good, and powerful God. 
That admitted, and then we can take up all testimon}^ for 
the miracles of revelation with as little embarrassment as 
the testimony that is given to us to prove the existence of 
Alexander, or Csesar, or I^apoleon, especially when we show 
the necessity of the Bible for the wants of man, and its 
adaptation for the human family in all ages, and the wise 
and benevolent end that the miracles of the Bible are de- 
signed to secure. 



EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES. 323 

Our argument is then narrowed down -to the simple point, 
Have we good testimony for the miracles of the Bible? To 
this we reply, more conclusive, more irresistible, more con- 
firmed by friends and foes, than can be given of any facts of 
ancient history uninspired. 

It is no small evidence of the genuineness of the Bible 
miracles that, after more than eighteen centuries of the most 
searching scrutiny, millions of the human race, all through 
this long interval of time, have believed in them. Who are 
those millions ? Are they found among the ignorant, or most 
enlightened, of mankind ? Are they of the wisest and best, 
or are they seen among the dullest and worst, of men ? ]^o- 
thing can be more evident than that where Christianity pre- 
vails, and is most from the heart received, there exists the 
strongest faith in miracles as recorded in the Bible, and there 
is shown the highest type of whatever is noble, and pure, 
and intelligent. 

One thing is certain; if Christianity is anything, it is 
that which is supernatural, and if its miracles are removed 
we take from it all that makes it a religion for sinners. Elimi- 
nate from the Bible its divine element, and we have nothing 
left but a residuum of rationalism, as empty of all power to 
benefit man as the teachings of any heathen moralist. It 
can be shown that no false religion could go through the 
ordeal of the Bible. 

Mohammed never dared to base the reception of the Ko- 
ran upon miracles. Coming in the darkest age of the world, 
and among a people the most credulous, yet even this most 
successful of impostors never presumed to work miracles, or 
his followers to believe that he did. But the Bible rests the 
evidence of its divinity, and its claim to be loved and re- 
ceived, upon miracles. Christ came with the words ever 
upon his lips, "Believe not unless I do the works no other 
man can do." Our Saviour rested his mission upon miracles. 
This was the test he offered to all. Is it possible that the 
Jews, in the most enlightened age, never would have found 
out the deception, if no miracles were worked ? Is it pos- 
sible that when Christ was arraigned for trial before the 



324 EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES. 

Jewish Sanhedrim and the Roman governor, no charge 
would have been brought against him of attempting to de- 
ceive by false miracles, if indeed Christ worked no miracles? 
;N'ow, the great fact that is ever to be borne in mind re- 
specting the miracles of the Bible, is simply this : they con.o 
under circumstances and upon occasions essentially differed' t 
from all false miracles or w^onders. It is the moral element 
connected with Scripture miracles that makes them so prob- 
able. It is because they are worked for no frivolous end ; 
they come when the necessities of man really demand; they 
appear at those epochs of time w^hen the impotence of natural 
law is self-evident ; where God is needed to interpose with a 
visible demonstration of his power, to flash conviction upon 
the mind. Consequently, the marked feature of the Bible 
miracles is their necessity^ and their peculiar adaptation for 
the end proposed of confirming the truth of the word of 
God. Observe, in contrast to real miracles, the false miracles 
professed at difl'erent periods of the world to be worked. If 
there were false Messiahs in the age immediately preceding 
tlije downfall of the Jewish race and their dispersion over the 
world, predicted b}' Christ himself, with equal truth there 
have been false miracles to impose upon the people; but 
there are tests ahvays to discriminate between gold that is 
gold and gold that has only the opj^iearance of it. The false 
miracles bore upon the face of them, as w^ell as carried, about 
in their very nature, the clearest proof of being but coiinter- 
feiis. They were wanting altogether in the moral element that 
marks all the Bible miracles. Then the circumstances undei* 
which they took place were favorable for deception; then 
the character of the persons who professed to w^ork them 
was such as would naturally awaken suspicion ; and, to 
crown the whole, not a solitary case in all history can be 
shown, outside of the Bible, of the raising of the dead, the w^alk- 
ing upon the waves of the sea, the feeding of five thousand 
people upon a few loaves and fishes, or making the winds and 
elements of nature instantly obedient to a word. Remember, 
it is not so much the miracles of the Bible in their number 
as in their significant nature that shows their infinite distance 



EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES. 325 

from all other miracles. Magicians, like the priests of 
Egypt, with their enchantments may turn their rods into ser- 
pents, or what appear to be serpents; but remember, Aaron's 
rod, that swallowed them all up, is the genuine miracle. 

Now the Yespasiauic wonders Hume speaks of as " among 
the best attested miracles in all profane history," or that 
related by the Cardinal de Retz, of a man recovering his leg 
by the rubbing of holy oil upon the stump, or that of the cures 
effected at the tomb of Abbe Paris, all carry with them 
the marks of base coin. No miracles except those of the 
Bible can for a moment stand the test of a sound and search- 
ing criticism. Utterly deficient in the moral element, they 
come in a way so unnatural, are witnessed, too, where decep- 
tion is so easy, and profess an end so unworthy of God, that 
the true miracles appear in contrast like the sun at noonday, 
making infinitely insignificant the poor rush-lights of human 
pride and presumption. 

Our first idea of a time miracle is, that while it comes under 
the supernatural, yet it is the most marked and peculiar 
action of the supernatural. It is just that agency of God 
that he makes use of only on those few and most momentous 
occasions where a necessity exists for something altogether 
different from any other mode of the supernatural. Can any 
person say that in the governmeiit of God he may not see 
exigencies where the interposition of miracle would be most 
wise and benevolent ? Take creation : what law of nature, 
we ask, where there is no law of nature? What natural 
acting, where the natural does not exist ? We talk of laws, 
and laws of nature, often without understanding anything 
that is meant by laws. In ninety-nine cases in a hundred, 
it is only convenient phraseology to cover up our ignorance 
of the whole subject. To make that to exist which never 
existed before, is the highest exercise of the supernatural, 
and such as most appropriately we call miraculous. It is 
miraculous in two important senses : the giving of a new 
nature, and then new laws to that nature. It means simple- 
acting differently from any previously existing laws of nature, 
and then, so far as any laws that do exist, in opposition to 



326 EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES. 

those laws. "When God makes something from nothing, or 
creates a new nature, he is not restricted to the dictionary 
of an old nature for the methods of his action. God is not 
so limited in his resources that he can only help himself to 
something that formerly existed, and act exclusively after 
those old processes that have once been in operation. Those 
old processes would not do in a new creation, and, if they 
might do, they would only be resorted to upon the ground 
simply of being the best that could be made use of. 

Our second idea of miracle is, that God never wastes 
almightiness in it. Ability to work and working are two 
very different things. There is no waste with God. What 
may be fashioned out of the old he takes, and what cannot 
he supplies. The laws of nature in existence that may be 
used he does thus use, and to that which cannot be used he 
imparts new. Man may throw away the crumbs that fall 
from his table, but God has some use for everything. Ac- 
cordingly, the miraculous will correspond in its development 
and frequency with the actual wants of the universe and the 
counsel of God after his own method of justice, benevolence, 
and wisdom. 

Our third idea of miracle is, that it is introduced just 
where and when the laws of nature are wanting, and is 
especially that form of the supernatural, and that recupera- 
tive energy of God's action that exists wlien the old nature 
is run out, or when a neio nature must be made. Thus, the 
law of birth and death never can introduce the resurrection 
state. The old nature has in it nothing to bring about a 
resurrection body ; no existing law in nature can accomplish 
this. The resurrection is a new nature to the body, raised 
from the grave with new laws and new ends of existence. 
This great miracle, substantiated by the resurrection of 
Christ, is introduced to bring about that which never before 
existed, as well as to incorporate into the new body what 
has existed. The reason for this miracle lies in the fact that 
the old nature is utterly inadequate, by any process of law, to 
produce the resurrection body ; it is not only above the sphere 
of the natural, but really in opposition to processes that exist 



EVIDE,XCE OF MIRACLES. 327 

in the natural, so that miracle comes in, as in creation, to 
secure a result that is not only divine but in the highest degree 
transcends all creature power. Miracle is essential for two 
great ends: first, the creating of the substance of all 'things 
material and immaterial, bringing into being all the exist- 
ences outside that of God ; and secondly, acting as the infinite 
recuperative energy of the universe in securing that which 
nature herself is unable to secure. Much as we may admire 
that recuperative energy in nature acting in accordance with 
established laws, by which injuries are repaired to the body, 
and the human system recovers from the power of disease, 
yet there is a sense where nature itself dies out and must 
be not so much repaired as made over again under new laws 
and conditions of being. Xow here is a recuperative en erg}', 
not imparted to the machinery of nature, not incorporated 
in any method of its own action, but above it and without it, 
where no second causes have sway and where alone God 
works. This energy is revealed in creative epochs of time, 
and when the cyclical ages have run out. 

Our fourth idea of miracle is, that it takes place at those 
periods of time most suitable for securing the great end of 
divine wisdom and goodness, and.^ therefore, can he hioini 
only to God himself. Our human reason must be in accord- 
ance with the laws of the natural, and we can only infer the 
contrary when God speaks and points out the way. If it is 
said that miracle, as defined, implies that God has not made 
nature as it should be made, and that it throws a reflection 
upon his wisdom in not giving to nature and its laws power 
to secure what miracle does, the reply is, God never meant 
that nature, even as the principle of second causes, should 
do everything in the universe, God never intended that his 
own sovereignty should be thrown into the shade by any 
action of natural law. 

Our fifth idea of miracle is, that while we may not be able 
to trace it to ^ny natural law, yet it may, for aught we know, 
be as truly under laws above nature as those effects that take 
place through natural law in the plane of nature. Xo person 
can say that God may not have a law of working of exact in- 



328 EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES. 

variability, under like circurastaiices, as truly as in any natural 
law ; and therefore, when miracle is spoken of as in viola- 
tion of the laws of nature, or opposition to them, then the 
one who thus objects to miracles must show, to be consistent, 
that God has no other laws but those in the line of nature, 
and that nature itself is eternal; he must show that nature 
needs no interposition of the supernatural, and that when 
God made any nature it was for an existence without end. 

But we contend that immortality is the gift of God ; it is 
something outside of nature, and, in itself, exclusively within 
the sphere of the supernatural. There has never, apart from 
the word of God, been any valid reason for affirming immor- 
tality to mind or matter. This condition must be the result 
of those circumstances and etfects brought about by a divine 
power, and not through the simple influence of natural law. 
We know that the soul is immortal, not because of its own 
inherent power of endless life, but through the supernatural 
energy of God in securing it to the soul ; and we know the 
body, under certain conditions, to be also immortal, because 
it is brought about by the miraculous energy of God. When, 
then, nature dies out, when all the powers of the natural fail 
to secure certain results intended by God, miracle comes in, 
not in violation of natural law, for natural law goes as far as 
it can and then stops, but in accordance with the higher law 
of the supernatural after the purpose of the Deity. God, 
then, has a place for miracles in the universe just as truly as 
a place for natural law, but that place is not to be found in 
nature, but in a sphere of activity immeasurably above it. It 
will be seen that, in nature, laws that are of invariable action 
to a certain extent are suspended, or other laws introduced, as 
the law of contraction by cold or expansion by heat, operating 
with invariable certainty through the whole realm of nature ; 
but in the case of the freezing of water at a certain point the 
reverse actually takes place, and expansion by cold fol- 
lows, while in that of steam or vapor a like deviation from 
the law of contraction by cold, or expansion by heat, follows, 
^ow, miracle, to secure a certain end, may be as truly in ac- 
cordance with a law above nature, having its activity in the 



EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES. 329 

direct working of God himself, as any deviation in nature 
from a general law. How can a person consistently object 
to miracle who admits creation? How can one say that 
miracles are impossible, or improbable, who sees prevailing 
through all nature the great principle of birth and death ; 
who cannot show, by any deduction of reason or fact of 
science, an inherent immortality in anything connected with 
the inorganic or organic kingdom ? How unphilosophical 
to speak of that as unreasonable, because it takes place 
after no natural law, but in a sphere immeasurably above it ! 
Because Ave know some laws, is not the inference foolish that 
we know all laws ? If nature, left to itself, must fail, is it 
not unwise to suppose that God has no other resources in re- 
serve, and that, in a way best known to him, he cannot bring 
about effects such as miracles to show his own perfect sover- 
eignty over nature, and the infinite ease with which he se- 
cures the vast ends of his wisdom and benevolence ? 

In all the miracles recorded in the Old and ISTew Testa- 
ment, how true the words of Paul : " God also bearing them 
witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers 
miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own 
wilL" 



CHAPTER Y. 

MIRACLES OF CHRIST. 

Were four separate witnesses to record facts seen by them, 
the highest evidence of truth to us would be, with varietj^ of 
language and diversity in minute details, an exact agreement 
in every essential circumstance. Precisely the same have we 
in the four narratives of the life and miracles of Christ. 
Their agreement in every important particular shows their 
veracity, and their variety of style and unimportant discrep- 
ancies evince that the}" had no collusion between them, and 
that each narrative is an independent treatise. 

Let us contemplate, in relation to the miracles of Christ, 
four thino^s : 

1. What were these miracles ? 

2. The age in which they were worked. 

3. How Christ's miracles differed from all other miracles. 

4. The impossibility of deception either in the Author of 
these miracles or those who recorded them. 

Our object is only to mention them in the order which 
Trench, in his valuable work on miracles, has given, while 
the student of miracles is directed to this work, and others 
on the same subject, in connection with a careful perusal of 
the four Evangelists, for a fuller knowledge of the details 
and the circumstances connected with their working. 

1. The water made wine. 

2. The healing of the nobleman's son. 

3. The first miraculous draught of fishes. 

4. The stilling of the tempest. 

6. The demoniacs in the country of the Gadarenes. 

6. The raising of Jairus's daughter. 

7. The woman with the issue of blood. 

8. The opening of the eyes of the blind in the house. 

(330 ) 



MIRACLES OF CHRIST. 331 

9. The healing of the paralytic. 

10. The cleansing of the leper. 

11. The healing of the centurion's servant. 

12. The demoniacs in the synagogues of Capernaum. 

13. The healins: of Simon's wife's^ mother. 

14. The raising of the widow's son. 

15. The healing of the impotent man at Bethesda. 

16. The miraculous feeding of live thousand. 

17. The walkino; on the sea. 

18. The opening of the eyes of one born blind. 

19. The restoring of the man with a withered baud. 

20. The woman with a spirit of infirmity. 

21. The healing of a man with a dropsy. 

22. The cleansing of the ten lepers. 

23. The healing of the daughter of the Syrophenician 
woman. 

24. The healing of one deaf and dumb. 

25. The miraculous feeding of four thousand. 

26. The opening of the eyes of two blind men at Beth- 
saida. 

27. The healing of the lunatic child. 

28. The stater in the fish's mouth. 

29. The raising of Lazarus. 

30. The opening of the eyes of two blind men near 
Jericho. 

31. The witherino^ of the fruitless fio^-tree. 

32. The healing of Malchus's ear. 

33. The second miraculous draught of fishes 

Observe, that while the circumstances under which these 
miracles were worked clearly show a supernatural power, 
there were yet some of more marked significance than others, 
and which could not possibly be mistaken for anything less 
than a most wonderful interposition of God, in showing a 
divine superiority to all natural law, and the counteraction 
of it in such a way as to prove the reality of the Messiahship 
of Christ. Eemember, the miracles worked were not only 
for a most beneficent end, but absolutely necessary to sub- 
stantiate the claims of Christ for the belief of all and the 



332 MIRACLES OF CHRIST. 

obedience of all. The question before the Jews was simply, 
Is Christ the true Messiah? Is his assertion that he was the 
Son of God, even as the Son of man, in a peculiar and most 
extraordinary sense, founded on reality and deserving to be 
universally trusted in ? ]^ow, the credentials to prove this 
were miracles. If Moses needed miracles to show his mis- 
sion from God and impose laws upon the Jews, much more 
did Christ need miracles to impose law^s upon the world and 
prove his Son ship with the Father. The mission of Moses 
bore no comparison in importance to the mission of Christ. 
Moses introduced the legal dispensation, Christ the Christian 
dispensation. Moses was simply human, Christ was divine; 
the one was set apart for a nation only, the other for all 
nations. Consequently, the significancy of the mission of 
Christ constituted in itself the highest reason for miracles. 
Without them the claims of Christ could not be sustained. 
All the predictions concerning Christ were of the nature to 
demand miracles. The prophets foretold that the Messiah 
would work them ; and, as the belief in this was universal 
among the Jews, miracles constituted in that age the strong- 
est evidence of the ti'uthfulness of his mission. 

Some of the miracles of Christ were of such a character 
that we read the people were beyond measure astonished, 
saying, " He hath done all things well." Observe, espe- 
cially, the miracle of feeding iive thousand at one time, and 
four thousand at another, wdth a few loaves and fishes, and 
the baskets full of fragments taken up after this astonishing 
exhibition of supernatural powder. Observe the walking of 
Christ upon the waves of the sea, the instant stilling of the 
tempest, the cleansing of the ten lepers, the opening of the 
eyes of one born blind, the raising of the widow's son, and 
the raising of Lazarus. Consider the end for which the 
miracles of Christ were Avorked, and the character of his in- 
structions, and it will be found that they were indispensable 
for the proof of his divine mission. They were the most effi- 
cient instruments to prove the authority of his instructions, 
and to show to his disciples that they were under a teacher 
deserving of their most sincere attachment and obedience. 



MIRACLES OF CHRIST. 333 

TVTiat, then, was the age in which they were worked? 
This age was the very period of the world most unfavorable 
for deception. The prevailing spirit was formalism and 
skepticism. The ruling class among the Jews was that of 
the Pharisees and the Sadducees. The former were the 
bigots of Judea, the latter the infidels. One buried up in 
senseless ceremonies and forms the true religion, the other 
were skeptical of all religion. One made void tte law through 
the vain traditions of the elders, the other in practice repu- 
diated the law. The religious convictions of both classes 
never penetrated beneath the mere shell of devotion, and, 
with but few exceptions, true piety was almost unknown in 
Judea. Xever, perhaps, did infidelity, which denied the 
most fundamental truths of the Old Testament, or formalism, 
which covered them all up in the rubbish of superstition, 
abound more than when the Son of God came to his own 
nnd his own received him not. 

The age when Christ came was peculiarly an enlightened 
age as contrasted with preceding ages. Thus, the Son of 
God came constantly in contact with the mind of the nation, 
fully awake, and disposed narrowly to examine into all claims 
for a homage and obedience that professed to derive their 
authority from God alone. It will also be remembered that 
the Jewish nation was then under Eoman sway. The Jews 
desired nothing so much as a king to throw off this hateful 
bondage; and the Messiah that should assert a spiritual 
kingship, while he would disclaim all worldly power or inten- 
tion of coming in conflict with a foreign power, would by 
this awaken most effectuallv the hostilitv of the rulins^ class 
among the Jews, and secure only the enmity or contempt of 
the nation. Xow, the very fact that Christ declared that 
his kingdom was not of this world, and that he would have 
nothing to do in opposing the dominion of foreigners, made it 
a task a thousandfold more difficult to convince the Jews of 
his Messiahship and secure their confidence. Christ placed 
himself directly in opposition to all the prejudices and all the 
cherished hopes of the people. Is it possible that the mira- 
cles of Christ under a test so severe would not be at once ex- 



334 MIRACLES OF CHRIST. 

posed, if indeed not real ? It is natural to admit what falls 
in with our feelings and our aspirations; but is it not hard to 
confess to the truth of that which is opposed to the most 
loved idols of the heart? Now, Christ worked his miracles 
under such conditions that failure would in an}^ instance 
have been eagerly seized upon by his enemies as an argu- 
ment to prove the falsity of his claims. Enemies that 
ascribed his miracles to Beelzebub because they were com- 
pelled to confess their truth, would have infinitely preferred 
to have attributed them to imposture," if the charge could 
be sustained. Enemies that accused him of blasphemy, and 
constrained, by their malignant devices, the Roman governor 
to order his crucifixion, would have felt it a signal triumph 
to show that Christ had deceived the people by false mir- 
acles. 

But it should be always borne in mind that they uni- 
formly confessed to the truth of his miracles, while they 
attributed them to the wrong source. Christ silenced his 
deadly foes by saying that Satan would not fight against 
himself, or willingly encourage an enemj' in his own house 
to destroy his kingdom. But the all-important fact, as prov- 
ing with the Jews at that age of the world the truthfulness 
of Christ's miracles, is seen in that they were opposed to 
Jesus, not upon the ground that he worked no miracles, but 
that he claimed only a spiritual dominion and was not dis- 
posed to interfere with the Roman power. Rather than sub- 
mit to such a Messiah, they would welcome any impostor that 
flattered their national vanity and professed himself willing 
to deliver them from a foreign yoke. 

Observe, also, how Christ's miracles differed from all other 
miracles. 

First. In their number. Our Saviour worked miracles far 
more numerous than Moses, or any other person mentioned 
in the Bible. His miracles were all crowded into a period 
of about three years; and yet how were those three years 
filled up with a brilliant succession of mighty w^orks ! Most 
truly with the public ministry of Christ did there appear the 
epoch of miracles. The end was worthy of this display of 



MIRACLES OF CHRIST. 335 

almighty power. Miracles flashed before the people with a 
distinctness and genuineness that could not be denied. 
Friends and foes were alike forced to confess the mighty 
deeds of Jesus. Christ challenged investigation, he worked 
his miracles in a way so clear and so convincing that unbe- 
lief itself had to attribute them to Beelzebub, and the deep- 
est enmity must torture them into the working of Satan. 
]^ow, the miracles of Christ were so numerous that finally 
the only alternative left the Jews was submission or cruci- 
fixion. Hatred itself could see no other way than believing 
in a spiritual Messiah or killing him ; but even this last re- 
sort of wickedness could not succeed unless every form of 
justice was made a mockery, and the night rather than the 
day was made to witness their deeds of darkness and the 
treachery of Judas. 

Second. All of Christ's miracles (remarks Trench) were 
worked with the utmost freedom and ease. "How difierent, 
in this respect, from the miracles of Moses and Elijah and 
Elisha and others ! Christ speaks but the word, and it is done. 
Thus Moses must plead and struggle with God, 'Heal her 
now, God, I beseech thee,' ere the plague of leprosy is re- 
moved from his sister, and not even so can he instantly win 
the blessing; but Christ heals a leper by his touch, and ten 
with even less than this, — merely by the power of his will 
and at a distance. Elijah must pray long, and his servant go 
up seven times, before tokens of the rain appear ; he also 
stretches himself thrice on the child and cries unto the Lord, 
and painfiilly wins back his life. And Elisha with even 
more efibrt, and only after partial failure, restores the child 
of the Shunamite to life. But Christ shows himself the 
Lord of the living and the dead, raising the dead with as 
much ease as he performed the commonest transactions of 
life. Moses shows impatience, but Christ reveals no imper- 
fection in any miracle." 

Third. " Where also," says Trench, " the miracles are 
similar in kind, his are larger and freer and more glorious. 
Elisha feeds a hundred men with twenty loaves, but he five 
thousand with five. They have continually their instrument 



336 MIRACLES OF CHRIST. 

of power to which the wonder-working power is linked. 
Moses has his rod, his staff of wonder, to divide the Red 
Sea and to accomplish his other mighty acts, without which 
he is nothing; his tree to heal the bitter waters ; Elijah di- 
vides the waters with his mantle ; Elisha heals the spring 
with a cruse of salt. But Christ accomplishes his miracles 
simply by the agency of his word, or by a touch ; or, if he 
takes anything as a channel of his healing power, it is from 
himself he takes it; or should he, as once he does, use any 
foreign medium (Johx, ix. 6), yet by other miracles of like 
kind, in which he has recourse to no such extraneous helps, 
he declares plainly that this was a free choice, and not of any 
necessity." 

Fourth. "Wliile their miracles and those of the apostles 
are ever done in the name of, and with the attribution of the 
glory to, another, ' Stand still and see the salvation of the 
Lord, which he will show you;' 'In the name of Jesus 
Christ of ITazareth, rise up and walk;' 'Eneas, Jesus Christ 
maketh thee whole ;' his are ever wrought in his own name 
and as in his own power. ^ I will, be thou clean.' *Thou 
deaf and dumb spirit, I charge thee come out of him.' 
'Young man, I say unto thee. Arise.' Even when he prays, 
being about to perform one of his mighty w^orks, his disci- 
ples shall learn, even from his prayer itself, that herein he is 
asking for a power which he had not indwelling in him, but 
indeed is only testifying thus to the unbroken oneness of his 
life with his Father's, just as on another occasion he will not 
suffer his disciples to suppose that it is for any but for their 
sakes that the testimony from heaven is borne unto him. 
Thus needful was it for them, thus needful for all, that they 
should have great and exclusive thoughts of him, and should 
not class him with any other, even the greatest and the holi- 
est of the children of men." 

Trench, in comparing the evangelical with other cycles of 
miracles, with great truth remarks : 

" "We do not find miracles sown broadcast over the whole 
of the Old Testament history, but they all cluster round a 
very few eminent persons, and have reference to certain 



MIRACLES OF CHRIST. 337 

great epochs and crises of the kingdom of God. Abraham, 
the father of the faithful, David, the great theocratic king, 
Daniel, the ' man greatly beloved,' are alike entirely without 
them, that is, they do no miracles; such may be accomplished 
in behalf of them, but they themselves accomplish none. 
In fact, there are but two great outbursts of these : the first, 
at the establishing of the kingdom under Moses and Joshua, 
on which occasion it is at once evident that they could not 
have been wanting; the second, in the time of Elijah and 
Elisha, and then also there was utmost need, when it was 
a question whether the court religion which the apostate 
kings of Israel had set up should not quite overbear the true 
worship of Jehovah, when the Levitical priesthood was es- 
tablished and the faithful were but a scattered few among the 
ten tribes. Then, in that decisive epoch of the kingdom's 
history, the two great prophets — they, too, in a subordinate 
sense, the beginners of a new period — arose, equipped with 
powers that should witness that He w^hose servants the}/ were 
was the God of Israel, however Israel might refuse to ac- 
knowledge him. There is here in all this an entire absence 
of prodigality in the use of miracles ; they are ultimate re- 
sources, reserved for the great needs of God's kingdom, not its 
daily incidents ; they are not cheap oif-hand expedients, which 
may always be appealed to, but come only into play when no- 
thing else would have supplied their room. IIow unlike this 
moderation to the wasteful expenditure of miracles in the 
church history of the middle ages ! There no perplexity can 
occur so trifling that a miracle will not be brought in to solve 
it; there is almost no saint, certainly no distinguished one, 
w^ithout his nimbus of miracles around his head : they are 
adorned with these in rivalry with one another, in rivalry with 
Christ himself; no acknowledgment like this, 'John did no 
miracle,' in any of the records of their lives, finding place." 
Trench also remarks: "The miracles of Scripture, and, 
among these, not so much the miracles of the Old Covenant 
as the miracles of Christ and his apostles, being the miracles 
of that highest and latest dispensation under which we live, 
we have a right to consider as normal, in their chief features 

22 



338 MIRACLES OF CHRIST. 

at least, for all future miracles, if such were to continue in 
the church. The details, the local cok)ring, may be different 
and there were no need to be perplexed at such a difference 
appearing; yet the later must not be in their inner spirit 
totally unlike the earlier, or they carry the sentence of con- 
demnation on their front. They must not, for instance, lead 
us back under the bondage of the senses, while those others 
were ever framed to release from that bondage. They must 
not be aimless and objectless, fantastic freaks of power, while 
those had every one of them a meaning and distinct ethical 
aim, were bridges by which Christ found access from men's 
bodies to their souls, — manifestations of his glory that men 
might be drawn to the glory itself. They must not be ludi- 
crous and grotesque, saintly jests, while those Avere evermore 
reserved and solemn and awful ; and lastly, they must not be 
seals and witnesses to auo-ht which the conscience, enlio^ht- 
ened by the word and Spirit of God, — whereunto is the ulti- 
mate appeal, and which stands above the miracle, and not be- 
neath it, — protests against as untrue (the innumerable Romish 
miracles which attest transubstantiation), or as error largely 
mingled with the truth (the miracles which go to uphold the 
whole Romish system), those other having set their seal only 
to the absolutely true. Miracles such as any of these we are 
bound by all which we hold most sacred, by all which the 
"Word of God has taught us, to reject and to refuse." 

Consider the impossibility of deception either in the author 
of those miracles, or those who recorded them. 

How could Christ, who worked such miracles as are re- 
corded by the four evangelists, be either deceived or deceive ? 
Look to the chain of evidence to show the truth. They 
were in the Old Testament predicted to take place under the 
coming Messiah ; they were worked for the noblest end ; they 
took place under such circumstances as were most unfavora- 
ble for concealment ; the}^ were confessed to by enemies as 
true, even while they were attributed to satanic power. 
Christ based the truth of his mission upon them ; he chal- 
lenged investigation ; he called for belief in these miracles 
simply upon the ground that they could not be denied. 



3IIRACLES OF CHRIST. 339 

At the trial of Jesus, could any doubt be thrown upon 
these miracles, the most would be made of it by his relent- 
less foes : but Christ's enemies were silent, simply because 
the miracles could not be denied. At the crucifixion the 
chief priests and Pharisees dared not in a single instance 
to charge our Saviour with deception. His accusers said, re- 
viling him, " He saved others, himself he cannot save." 

Observe, also, the greatness of the condemnation Christ 
pronounced against those who would not believe upon him. 
Upon what w^as this based ? Upon the ground that he per- 
formed xcorks which no other man could do; and because his 
mission was fully attested to by these works shown to be di- 
vine, therefore all were inexcusable for unbelief and reject- 
ing him. Could there be any meaning in this, did Christ 
work no miracles ? Would there be any reality in the de- 
nunciations of Christ against unbelievers if there was no- 
thing miraculous in his works to believe in ? If Christ was 
deceived, could his disciples be willing to follow him, confess 
him before the world, or ever attempt to convince his ene- 
mies of the truth of our Saviour's mission, if nothing of 
miracle could be shown to prove his claims ? Christ could 
not deceive, for then he would cease to be a holy example 
for all to imitate : neither could he be deceived, for then he 
could not present any inducement to follow him, or any dis- 
position be shown upon the part of his disciples to suffer 
and die for him. Besides, Christ came to introduce the 
Christian dispensation, to be the Saviour of the world. With- 
out miracles it would have been impossible to secure the 
confidence of friends, or silence the malicious charges of 
enemies. 

To that generation, when it was all-important that mira- 
cles should be granted to prove the words of Christ, the ab- 
sence of these miracles would be always an unanswerable 
argument against the mission itself. Equally obvious is it 
that those who recorded the miracles of Jesus could neither 
deceive nor be deceived. Men do not rush into torture, dis- 
grace, death, w^ithout a motive. Human nature does not 
welcome poverty, persecution, contempt, and the loss of all 



340 MIRACLES OF CHRIST. 

worldly considerations, without a reason. And the circum- 
stances that attended Christ and his disciples, the hardships 
they voluntarily endured, the extreme privation they were 
subjected to, all show the utter impossibility of passing ofi* 
any miracle as true that was false. Eemember, Christ wished 
none to follow him who had no faith and love to him ; he 
welcomed to his heart no disciple who was not willing to 
take up his cross and follow him. Over and over again did 
our Saviour disabuse the mind of his followers of any worldly 
advantage to be reaped from the acceptance of him. He had 
nothing of the earth to oiFer to his disciples, and, conse- 
quently, there could be no reason, no possible motive, to 
suffer and die for Christ, unless he had performed those 
mighty works which no man could do, and which, when per- 
formed, afforded evidence irresistible that all the miracles 
recorded were true and came from God. 



CHAPTEE YI. 

BIRTH, RESURRECTION, AND ASCENSION OF CHRIST, AND THE 
MIRACLES OF HIS APOSTLES. 

Three great miracles are connected with the person of 
Christ, — his birth, his resurrection, and his ascension. The 
birth of our Saviour was in the highest sense supernatural ; 
born of the Virgin Mary by the Holy Ghost, he had strictly our 
humanity, without any taint of original sin ; he came into the 
world a perfect child, even as he showed himself afterward a 
perfect youth and man. The circumstances connected with 
the advent of Christ into the world were all most peculiar and 
most wonderful. Christ was preceded, as foretold, by John 
the Baptist, who proclaimed the mission of the Ivedeemei* of 
man, and confessed his immeasurable inferiority to him. 
Angels heralded his coming with the song of the shepherds 
keeping their flocks by night, " Glory to God in the highest, 
and on earth peace, good will toward men." Well might 
they by the angel be addressed in the words: '^Behold, I 
bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all 
people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David 
a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord." The birthplace of 
Christ, the Messiah, was foretold by Micah, who was nearly 
cotemporary with Isaiah: "Thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, 
though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out 
of thee shall He come forth unto me, who is to be ruler in 
Israel." Xow, all profane history coincides with sacred his- 
tory, in the accuracy of the fulfillment of all the predictions 
concerning the circumstances under which Christ came to 
the world. The flight of Joseph into Egypt was owing to 
the murder of the infants of Bethlehem by the cruel order 
of Herod, and the residence of Joseph and Mary in oS'aza- 
reth resulted from the known cruelty and wickedness of 

(341) 



342 BIRTH, RESURRECTION, AND 

Archelaus, who succeeded his father in the rule of Judea. l^o 
fact in history, sacred or profane, is better established than 
the supernatural birth of Christ, and the wonderful events 
connected with it. 

Consider the great miracle of the resurrection of Christ. 
This event was fully confirmed by the clearest evidence. 
Thomas had not only the evidence of sight, but of touch. 
Christ, not once, but often was seen by the disciples, and 
finally, before his ascension, he was seen of five hundred of 
the brethren. Every precaution had been used to secure 
death and prevent Christ's resurrection, foretold by himself. 
A Roman soldier had pierced his side with a spear, a guard 
was placed over his sepulcher, his disciples were few and de- 
spised, scattered and unbelieving. They could neither 
credit his testimony nor be consoled in view of his death. 
And yet, if Christ did not rise from the dead, how happened 
it that Jews and Romans, friends and enemies, were all de- 
ceived ? How happened it that the sacred historians should 
fabricate a story that would only expose them to the con- 
tempt of the good and the persecution of the wicked ; that 
they should invent a lie where no motive existed for it 
and no possibility appeared of making it believed ? Why 
should the chief priests attempt to bribe the Roman guard to 
circulate the story that Christ's disciples stole him away, if 
indeed our Saviour did not rise from the grave? Why 
should the disciples proclaim Christ to all as arisen from the 
grave, unless the proof of this mighty miracle was of such a 
nature as to be impossible to be denied ? The disciples of 
our Lord could not invent the story of Christ's resurrection, 
if untrue; for those who crucified our Saviour would have 
been glad of doing the same to his followers if they were 
convicted of falsehood and blasphemy ; and certainly, if 
honest men, they were in no condition to be deceived. Their 
master had been subjected to an ignominious death ; his grave 
was watched by jealous enemies ; no human power could 
deliver even the dead body of their Lord from the possession 
of the Roman soldiers. IN'ow, what motive could exist to 
practice a deception that offered no worldly advantages, and 



ASCEiYSIOX OF CHRIST, ETC. 343 

exposed to certain calamity all who attempted it? How 
happened it that, in confirmation of a falsehood, Peter 
should have boldly charged home upon the Jews the cru- 
cifixion of Christ, and that three thousand at the day of 
Pentecost, deceived by an impostor, should sacrifice, with 
all the disciples of Christ, every earthly good in confirma- 
tion of an untruth ? 

Consider, as another evidence of the truth of the wonder- 
ful works of Christ, the substantial agreement of the four 
evangelists, who have recorded tlie miracles of Christ, and 
the united confirmation in their favor of the other disciples. 
Let it be borne in mind that while there does exist in the 
four evangelists a substantial agreement upon essential 
facts and the main scope of the subject-matter of thought, 
there yet is embodied in these narratives of the life and doc- 
trines of Christ their own peculiar idiosj-ncrasies of mind 
and that marked individuality which conclusively show 
neither sameness nor servile imitation; and this very diver- 
sity of style, with unity of end and harmony in every im- 
portant particular, carries with it the highest internal evi- 
dence of truth. 

The ascension of our Lord took place forty days after his 
resurrection upon the Mount of Olives, about two miles from 
Jerusalem. Xow, this great event is shown true by the tes- 
timony of witnesses who could not have been deceived. As 
an indisputable fact, it is recorded by the four evangelists ; 
it accorded also with the predictions of Christ, and was made 
necessary by the supernatural character of his mission and 
the nature of all his instructions to his disciples. It was not 
only essential for the success of Christianity that Christ 
should rise from the dead, but that he should, after confer- 
ring the gift of the Holy Spirit upon his followers, return 
bodily to his Father in heaven. Christ having made an 
atonement for the sins of the world, it became him to show 
not only his triumph over the grave, but the glory of his 
spiritual reign, by returning unto that home of infinite 
blessedness from which he came to redeem lost man. 

The miraculous character of the birth, resurrection, and 



344 BIRTH, RESURRECTION, AND 

ascension of Christ was in perfect harmony not only with 
the predictions of the prophets of the Old Testament, but 
with the character of his instructions and the nature of his 
mission in this world. As the Son of God, coming for the 
specific end of the redemption of sinners, it would have been 
impossible to secure that end without the threefold miracle 
of his birth, resurrection, and ascension. The visible king- 
ship of Christ, at his first advent, would have conflicted with 
his spiritual reign in the hearts of his followers ; and there- 
fore it was essential that Christ should, after attaining unto 
the end of his mission, return unto his Father. Remember, 
also, that so indispensable especially was the resurrection of 
our Lord, that he based upon it the whole success of his re- 
ligion in the world, and the disciples made the fact of Christ 
rising from the dead the all-conclusive argument of Chris- 
tianity, and boldly chaHenged the severest investigation to 
disprove it. This alone encouraged them and confirmed 
their faith upon an immovable foundation. With the cer- 
tainty of this truth ever present in their minds, they did not 
hesitate to come into conflict with the enemies of the Re- 
deemer, and convict them in their unbelief of a sin as unreas- 
onable as it was pernicious to all their interests for time and 
eternity. ^N'ow, could the disciples of Christ have dared to 
attempt to palm ofl' an imposition upon the world, when the 
whole world, spiritually, was in arms against Christianity, and 
would cheerfully crush it unless based upon triUh that no 
sophistry could gainsay, nor ingenuity deny ? 

Consider the miracles worked by the apostles after the 
death and the ascension of Christ into the heavens. Those 
miracles took place under circumstances where deception 
was impossible. As one instance, take the case of the lame 
man from his birth instantly healed by Peter ; he was known 
by all the Jews who resorted to the temple ; he sat at the 
gate called Beautiful. There, before a great concourse of 
people, before enemies who would not be deceived, this lame 
man, at a word, immediately received strength in his feet 
and ankle-bones, and, leaping up, stood, and walked, praising 
God. 



ASCENSION OF CHRIST, ETC. 345 

The priests of the temple and the Sadducees, grieved that 
Christ and his resurrection should be taught, laid hold upon 
Peter and John and put them in confinement. But mark 
the result of that miracle in confirmatiou of the divine mis- 
sion of the Son of God. Five thousand believed upon the 
apostles, and those captious euemies who saw the boldness of 
Peter and John, and the man which was healed standing with 
them, could not say anything against it, and, in their con- 
fusion, exclaimed, " What shall w^e do to these men ? for 
that indeed a notable miracle hath been done by them 
is manifest to all them that dwell in Jerusalem, and we 
cannot deny it." Can any have the credulit}- to believe 
that when Judaism was tottering on its throne, when a long- 
standing hierarchy was endangered, when temple and priest 
and the whole system of Mosaic ritualism, venerable for ages 
of growth, shook like an aspen-leaf before a few obscure, un- 
learned men, destitute alike of power, wealth, and honor, 
that imposture could have been palmed oft'? If the miracles 
professed to be worked were false, the disciples gained 
nothing but the contempt of all good persons and the cer- 
tain triumph of their opponents. There was too much at 
stake to imagine even a chailce for imposture. 

Consider, also, that not two nor three great miracles were 
professed to be worked in confirmation of Christianity, but 
many, upon various occasions, and where the greatest pub- 
licity was coarted; miracles, too, when the religion of Christ 
was in its infancy, when the wealth, power, learning, and 
influence of the state were arrayed against it; miracles so 
numerous, under such a combination of circumstances, that 
one failure clearly proved would discredit the whole; where 
the chance for deception was not as one to a million ; where 
no occasional success would do, but uniform, uninterrupted 
triumph in all cases was essential to secure confidence and 
belief. Consider that converts from the ranks of enemies 
were secured in vast multitudes, of every rank and profession 
of life, among Jews and Gentiles ; converts who sacrificed 
riches and honors, security, and all pleasures held dear by 
the world, for a conviction of the mind that no misfortune 



346 BIRTH, RESURRECTION, AND 

could shake, and no enmity master. Xow, this is a fact 
borne out by history, sacred and profane. Josephus, Tacitus, 
Julian, Celsus, and Porphyry, not friends only, but enemies, 
coniirm this fact. And th^i, upon the side of friends, not 
the writers of the Bible only, but the apostolic fathers, Bar- 
nabas, Clement, Hermes, Ignatius, and Polycarp, — the leaders 
of the Christian Church, and historians after the age of the 
apostles, — Justin Martyr, Irenasus, Tertullian, the two 
Gregories, and Jerome, all coniirm the indisputable fact of 
the greatness and the number of the miracles of the ]^ew Tes- 
tament. The Jews, in every age, preserved with sedulous 
care the Okl Testament; the miracles of that are not only 
universally acknowledged b}^ the Jews themselves in every 
age, but are confessed true by Christ and the apostles. IS'o 
such mass of testimony exists for other historic facts. The 
truth that Ciesar composed his Commentaries, or Alexander 
fought his battles, rests not upon a hundredth part of the tes- 
timony that the miracles of revelation do ; and yet who 
doubts that Ctesar or Alexander once lived, or fought the 
battles recorded ? 

But, as an additional evidence of the miracles of Christ 
and his apostles, consider that no possible motive could exist 
for deception. A man must have a motive for lying; but 
what motive for lying could exist with the writers of the 
Bible? 

Truth, wdien persecuted, when, like a hunted, forlorn out- 
cast, it walks upon thorns, dwells in the caverns of the earth, 
lives w^here the world's honors, riches, and pleasures die out, — 
truth that is gibbeted, burnt at the stake, devoured by the 
lions of a Roman amphitheater, — truth crucihcd, hated, de- 
spised, and tormented in the family and the state, made igno- 
minious and painful, — truth sitting in sackcloth and ashes, is 
not avowed, loved, believed in by thousands, unless it be 
truth. If the disciples of Christ did not work miracles, they 
neither could nor would jprofess them ; and if their reality was 
not confirmed by testimony that could not be denied, then 
thousands would not have sacrificed everything for decep- 
tion, — deception that conferred neither pleasure, honor, nor 



ASCENSION OF CHRIST, ETC. 347 

wealth, — deception that subjected to every outward calamity 
and the upbraidings of an abused nature and perjured con- 
science. A story like this demands the greatest conceivable 
credulity, and involves itself a greater miracle than all the 
miracles of the Bible together. If, after a consideration of 
the circumstances connected with the miracles of Christ and 
the apostles, they are not to be credited, then it is impossible 
to imagine any fact of history worthy of belief. 



CHAPTEE YII. 



MIRACLES OF MOSES. 



With the patriarchal dispensation and the calling of Abra- 
ham, more than nineteen hundred years before the coming 
of Christ, there was made known the distinct separation of 
a nation, the lineal descendants of Abraham, who should be 
the chosen depositaries of the gospel, and of whom, as con- 
-cerning the flesh, Christ should come. The promise that in 
Abraham, as the father of the faithful, the nations of the 
earth should be blessed, was more particularly manifested 
when Christ our Saviour appeared; but in another sense 
Avas the world benefited by the selection of a distinct race 
to be the especial objects of the divine protection and love. 
The world, at the calling of Abraham, had greatly relapsed 
into idolatry. To preserve the knowledge of the true God, 
it was necessary that one nation should be set apart for the 
express object of maintaining a knowledge of the unity of 
the true God. Consequently, we find the selection of the 
Jews, who were to be distinguished as the keepers of the 
sacred oracles, and for whom a succession of wonders were 
to be worked to preserve them from being altogether de-. 
stroyed by the idolatrous nations by which they were sur- 
rounded. During the years that elapsed from the calling of 
Abraham to the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt, we have 
made known the increasing wickedness of the Canaanites, 
who were the original inhabitants of Palestine. It was when 
the cup of their iniquity was full, after an existence of more 
than four hundred years before the calling of Abraham, that 
we have made known to us the wonders in the land of Egypt. 
Let us, then, consider the miracles of Moses in the land of 
Egypt, and see if in any way they can be made to appear the 
(348) 



MIRACLES OF 2I0SES. 349 

work alone of human power. Let us consider the circum- 
stances of the Israelites and the peculiar relation they sus- 
tained to the Egyptians, and see if any other than a divine 
power, miraculously put forth, could account for the deliver- 
ance of the oppressed Israelites. 

As soon as Pharaoh, who befriended Joseph and his breth- 
ren, was dead, there arose in Egypt a race of kings who 
looked with jealousy upon the strangers in their midst ; they 
viewed with fear and envy their rapid increase, and began to 
devise ways by which they might be brought wholly under 
their power. To destroy them would be to lose their useful 
services as slaves ; to let them continue in their natural in- 
crease would be making them too formidable for their inter- 
ests. The only course that presented itself as adapted to 
their end was to keep them in abject bondage, and to slay 
their male children. Thus their hardships, with their growth 
as a nation, increased, and what slavery could not do, Pha- 
raoh sought to accomplish by infanticide. But in the darkest 
day of their adversity God raised up for them in the house 
of Pharaoh a deliverer. Moses, so called because saved from 
the water, was appointed by God to secure the independence 
of his nation. At the age of eighty years he commenced 
that series of wonders that has made memorable to all suc- 
ceeding time the land of Egypt. But consider the circum- 
stances under which the ten plagues were sent upon Egypt, 
and the end for which they were sent. 

The Egyptians were sunk into the deepest idolatry ; they 
worshiped not only the sun, moon, and stars, but birds, rep- 
tiles, and brute animals. To suppose that the Israelites were 
not contaminated by the example of their masters is to con- 
tradict their subsequent history in the desert, and their known 
inclination to worship idols. In Egypt, with the vices of 
slaves they had all the fear of slaves. Every manly and noble 
impulse seemed to be crushed under that iron bondage which 
befell them. Doomed to the thankless task of brickmaking, 
unrewarded for the severest toil, their male offspring mur- 
dered, all national hope, all energy, seemed to have expired. 
They distrust their deliverer, Moses ; they upbraid him when 



350 MIRACLES OF 3fOSES. 

doing the best service for them, and alike in their actions 
and their whole deportment they appear to be only degraded 
slaves. To effect simply a deliverance from bondage to the 
Israelites was but a small part of the task of Moses. It was 
to educate them to a better religion, to impress upon their 
minds the one true God, to deliver them from the idolatry 
even more than the slavery of the Egyptians, — this was the 
great task to be performed. On the other hand, the Egyp- 
tians were proud in their oppression ; they were given up to 
the most cruel despotism even as the most debasing idolatry. 
]S"either king nor nation would of their own accord emancipate 
the Jews. Here, then, we see a twofold end to be attained 
unto by miracle, even deliverance from bondage and the 
counteraction of idolatry, under circumstances that would 
clearly show the supremacy of the God of the Jews. Conse- 
quently, we see that the known instrumentality selected for 
the Jews was such as to preclude the idea that the work per- 
formed was of man and not of God. "Not only was the end 
proposed for miracles most suitable, and worthy of God, but 
such as could not be attained unto by any human power. No 
human power could save the Israelites or conquer the Egyp- 
tians, in the peculiar circumstances in which they were placed. 
No human power was able to conduct through the desert the 
Israelites, and from the debasement of slaves to make them 
a free and powerful nation. If Moses could, unaided by the 
direct power of God, have guided the Jews to the promised 
land, with no miracles as the credentials of his authority, he 
yet could not without miracles have made the Jews acknowl- 
edge the unity of God and his infinite superiority to the 
gods of the Egyptians. It was not simply to deliver the Jews 
from civil bondage, but to educate them as the chosen people 
of God, — that was the end to be secured. Thus we see a 
double occasion for the Mosaic miracles. First, the necessity 
of the miraculous interposition of God, to secure for the 
Jews, in their low condition, political freedom, and then the 
necessity, equally great, to emancipate the Jews from Egyp- 
tian idolatry. Now, all the means adopted to deliver the Is- 
raelites were designed to impress upon their minds the injB.- 



MIRACLES OF 3I0SES. 351 

nite superiority of the one God to the polytheism of the 
heathen. The Jews were to be set apart from all nations as 
the peculiar people of God, and to be made a standing monu- 
ment to the nations of the earth of the superiority of God to 
all idols. Does not the whole history of the wonderful pres- 
ervation of the Israelites in Egypt, and their more wonderful 
deliverance, show that this was the end to be secured? So 
far from the improbability of miracles professed to be worked 
by Moses, it is impossible to account for the preservation of 
the Jews, and their subsequent possession of Canaan, without 
a miraculous interposition of God. What more improbable, 
if Moses worked no miracles, than that a whole nation, con- 
sisting of more than three millions, could be induced, in oppo- 
sition to a powerful enemy, to leave Egypt ? But this im- 
probability is augmented a thousandfold when we consider 
the forty years' wanderings of the Jews in the desert. That 
three millions could subsist a year in the desert, or be induced 
to stay half that time as wanderers over the desolate land 
of Arabia, is an impossibility in itself, without a miraculous 
interposition of God. But not only were miracles necessary 
to deliver the Jews, but without them neither Pharaoh nor 
the Jews could be convinced of the divine mission of Moses. 
Moses was a fugitive from Pharaoh's court, a friendless out- 
cast from the honors and emoluments of power; he had 
nothing in himself to deliver the Jews. He was no less an 
object of aversion to the Egyptians than of suspicion to his 
brethren. Without riches, fame, or military strength, his 
very proposition to deliver from bondage the Jews, without 
miracles, was the most visionary imaginable. But, more than 
this, Pharaoh was not to be persuaded to let the Israelites go 
without miracles. Even when he did let them ffo, after the 
most majestic tokens of divine power, it was extorted from 
his fears, and not from his love. His heart clung to his idols. 
How, without a miraculous interposition, was Pharaoh to be 
compelled to let the Israelites go ? Consider the great inter- 
ests at stake demanding miracles. If ever there was an occa- 
sion for their use, certainly the introduction of the Mosaic 
or legal dispensation was one. The patriarchal state was to 



352 MIRACLES OF MOSES. 

be succeeded by a higher development of the divine mercy 
to mankind. The promise to Abraham was to be fulfilled in 
the gathering together of a nation, free and powerful, in the 
predicted land of Canaan. Consequently, as preparatory to 
the coming of Christ, the unity of God, and the nature of 
his law, and the necessity of an atonement for sin, were to be 
revealed in a fixr more impressive way than ever before. If 
the calling of Abraham was attended with miracles, more 
truly the ushering in of the law of Sinai, and the political 
and moral elevation of a whole nation, under the most de- 
pressed circumstances, demanded the interposition of God. 

Let us, then, consider the ten plagues of Egypt and the 
subsequent miracles of Moses. They come to us as facts re- 
vealed in the Bible and confirmed by the light that profane 
history throws upon that age. Miracles are events so ex- 
traordinary as to forbid the supposition of the operation of 
natural law. They come as events marking the supernatural 
working of God. Consequently, they are the credentials of 
God, to show that he works, and that he is to be believed in. 
In order to convince Pharaoh, or the Jews, Moses must work 
miracles. He goes to Pharaoh with the demand to let Israel 
go. What was the natural course, under these circumstances, 
for Pharaoh to pursue ? Evidently, to question the authority 
of Moses for making a request so extraordinary; and thus he 
did. " And Pharaoh said. Who is Jehovah, that I should 
obey his voice ? I know not Jehovah, neither will I let Israel 
go." Again Moses is sent to repeat the command. The 
king refuses, upon their want of authority, and demands a 
miracle as the evidence. A miracle is wrought, — Aaron 
throws down his stafi:^, and it becomes a serpent. I^ow, what- 
ever may have been the enchantments of the Egyptian priests, 
it is certain that they performed by their magic wonders, in- 
ferior, it may be, to those of Moses and Aaron, but of such 
a nature as to give a plausible objection to the refusal of the 
king to let the Israelites go. We pretend not to sa}' whether 
the legerdemain of the magicians of Pharaoh was miraculous 
or- not, but my argument for miracles of the most unques- 
tionable nature is but the more confirmed when the preju- 



MIRACLES OF MOSES. 353 

diced mind of the king, shielding himself by the magic of 
his priests, arrogantly gave Moses and Aaron to understand 
that his men could work as good miracles, if not as great, as 
themselves, and, consequently, his authority was as good as 
theirs. Henceforth God commissioned Aaion and Moses to 
work other miracles. The Nile is turned into blood, and the 
frogs cover the land. The magicians, upon an inferior scale, 
to the mind of the king apparently effect the same wonders. 
Thus, in the trial between God and the gods of Pharaoh, the 
result thus far had been only to the king the acknowledgment 
that Moses was the superior magician. Now miracles were to 
be worked, so peculiar and so wonderful as to compel Pharaoh 
and his priests to give up in despair, and confess the divine 
authority of the mission of Moses. Commencing with the 
mildest form of miracle, there was to flash before the mind 
a far higher indication of the power of God. The plague of 
lice comes, a miracle of creation ; the magicians renew their 
efforts, but altogether fail in imitating it. Pharaoh, now 
stripped of every apology, fiercely intrenches himself in the 
stubbornness of his heart, and refuses to let the people go. 
Then comes the swarm of flies; then the plague of boils and 
blains; then the plague of hail; then of locusts, which de- 
vour all the green herbage of Egypt; then of the three days' 
darkness; then of the more fearful visitation of the death of 
the first-born ; and, finally, this increasing series of divine 
visitations of wrath upon a godless king and nation is con- 
summated in the drowning of Pharaoh and the Egyptians in 
the Red Sea. 

The circumstances in which the Israelites w^ere placed, pre- 
vious to this fearful destruction of the Egyptians, were most 
extraordinary. Skeptics have solaced themselves with the 
idea that the Israelites might have passed over a branch of 
the Red Sea, at the northern extremity, as being only an 
estuary at low tide. But what the Israelites might have 
done is quite difierent from the actual course they were re- 
quired to take. The great design of the series of the Mosaic 
miracles was to convince the Jews of the unit}' and absolute 
supremacy of the God of Abraham above all the gods of 

23 



354 MIRACLES OF MOSES. 

EgjqDt. Coiiseqiientlj^ upon a scale the most magnificent, 
we read of that series of wonders that were to prepare the 
way for the emancipation of the whole nation from civil and 
religious bondage. The end was worthy of the means. The 
design was such only as God could conceive of and omnis- 
cience execute. True religion, the knowledge of the one 
infinite and glorious God, had nearly expired from the earth. 
In what better way, then, than that revealed in the Bible, 
was there to be a counteraction of an evil so universal and 
so threatening ? But there was another design in the destrnc- 
tion of the Egyptians in the Eed Sea, of vast importance. 
All the other miracles worked in Egypt had awed, but not 
subdued, the avaricious spirit of the Egyptians. The march- 
ing forth of the vast multitude of the Israelites from Egypt 
had been extorted from the fears and not the willing consent 
of either king or people. Consequently, a feeble, enslaved 
arni}', encumbered with women and children, wandering 
within a few days' march from Egypt, would be, sooner or 
later, a prey to the incensed Egyptians. Some decisive blow 
was to be struck, so great and so powerful as that henceforth 
the timorous hearts of the Israelites would have nothing to 
fear from their old oppressors. This was the primary object 
of the miracle of the Ked Sea, expressly declared in the 
inspired word: "I will be honored upon Pharaoh and all 
his hosts, that the Egyptians may know that I am the Lord." 
Instead, therefore, of the Israelites taking the main road, 
tlie open route at the head of the Red Sea, leading into the 
desert, they are ordered to march down tlie shore to the 
south, by a route which could lead them only into the heart 
of Africa, and in defiles so bad as that, if pursued, they could 
neither fight nor ^y. ^N'ever were the wise taken in their own 
craftiness more eflPectually than Pharaoh and his host. Reas- 
oning upon all human calculation, victory was both certain 
and easy for the Egyptians. Pharaoh pursued after his 
slaves, and soon reached their encampment. On one side was 
the desert, upon the other the Red Sea, and directly in their 
rear, shutting out all possibility of escape, were the mighty 
forces of the land of Egypt, with their chariots of war. 



MIRACLES OF MOSES. 355 

Under what circumstances could a miracle be more necessary, 
or impress the mind with a deeper conviction of the superi- 
ority of Jehovah to the false gods of Egypt ? Unless God 
interposed, all was lost. With a bitter taunt the Israelites 
cry out against their leader, " Were there no graves in Egypt, 
that thou hast taken us away to die in the wilderness ?" 

God now commands Moses to stretch out his rod over the 
Red Sea, " that the Israelites may pass on dry ground." 
The Egyptians follow in after them. When the morning 
watch is come, the Israelites reach the shore, and the whole 
body of the Egyptians are in the sea-bed. What a spectacle 
now presents itself of awful grandeur ! 

Over the sea-sand the enemy's chariots drive heavily. At 
last they cry out, " The Lord fighteth for Israel." The com- 
mand is given, " And the Lord said unto Moses, Stretch out 
thine hand over the sea, that the waters may come again upon 
the Egyptians." The destruction was total. "There re- 
mained not so much as one of them." 

We will not dwell upon the other miracles of Moses. For 
wise reasons the Israelites were condemned to wander forty 
years in the desert. But for a multitude so great to subsist 
in the desert so long, miracles constant and vast were abso- 
lutely necessary. But the end was worthy of the means. The 
desert was to be the school of religion and good discipline for 
the Israelites. Here was the law of Sinai to be given, with its 
majestic glory. Here was to be the pillar of cloud by 
day, and the pillar of fire by night. Here the consecrated 
priests were to bear the Ark of the Covenant, where abode 
the awful Shechinah. Here manna daily was to come down 
from heaven, except upon the holy Sabbath. Here waters 
from the rock were to flow to quench the thirst of the 
multitude. All was one vast series of miracles such as 
man never yet had seen, for one great end, the preservation 
of true religion. For this object a nation was selected and 
surrounded w^ith all the tokens of an ever-present God, 
For this object the rigid discipline of forty years was en- 
forced to wean the Israelites from the idols of the heathen. 
A new dispensation was to be ushered in, amid the fires 



356 MIRACLES OF 310SES. 

of Sinai and its dread tlmnders. The end was such that 
nothing but miracle could secure it. God was to be every- 
thing, man nothing. Human instrumentality was to be for- 
gotten before the steady blaze of divine agency. Now, such 
are revealed facts : of their philosophy we know nothing. 
But one thing is certain : the Israelites never could have been 
delivered from Egypt, never preserved in the desert, they 
neither would nor could have received Moses as their leader, 
or submitted to the law. of Sinai, or conformed to the cere- 
monial ritual, or acknowledged as divine the Pentateuch, 
or confessed in every age that the mission of Moses was 
from God, had not the miracles recorded been worked. 



CHAPTER VIII. 



EVIDENCE OF PROPHECY. 



Prophecy is the history of the future ; it is the exercise of 
a foresight into events yet to come, such only as omniscience 
is capable of. Human beings have often attempted to pry 
into the future, and to pronounce with confidence upon events 
yet to take place. The heathen have had their oracles. The 
most renowned nations of antiquity have been influenced to 
place confidence in the auguries of soothsayers, or the famed 
responses of Delphi or Dodona. The restless curiosity of 
man has often attempted to unveil the secrets of futurity and 
fathom the deep purposes of God. To a certain extent, some 
knowledge of the future may be reached by an uninspired 
man. When some law of the mental or physical world is 
understood, it can be found out from its known results what 
in the future will be its operation. The mind of man may 
attain unto some knowledge of futurity by the experience of 
the past. But this knowledge is only of the most general 
nature ; nothing is known of particulars. The limit of hu- 
man predictions is circumscribed within the most narrow 
boundary, and cannot extend to things specific, minute, and 
multiplied. We may say that a man who gives himself up to 
the habitual sway of his appetites or passions, having the love 
of strong drink, or anger and violence, will die prematurely. 
But who can designate the hour or minute of his decease ? 
We may predict from the ravages of the pestilence the wide- 
spread disease that will ensue ; but who can mark the number 
of victims, or foretell the exact period and extent of the in- 
roads of the unseen destroyer? 

From mathematical laws the eclipse may be predicted 
years before the event takes place ; but who can say when law 
itself may not be suspended by miracle, or foretell the future 
changes that will take place among those myriads of worlds 

(357) 



358 EVIDENCE OF PROPHECY. 

that people the universe ? Even upon the most common 
events of life uncertainty rests. The darkness that encircles 
the future, none hut an omniscient eye can penetrate. The 
prophecies of the Bible differ in every respect from the pro- 
ductions of heathen oracles. ]^ot more marked is the differ- 
ence between gold and its counterfeit, than is the distinction 
between the prophecies of the Scriptures and uninspired pro- 
ductions. Take, as an illustration, the celebrated oracles of 
Delphi and Dodona. Here, as in false miracles, we can 
trace every w^onder to mere human contrivance and the 
practiced arts of successful impostors. Reason itself would 
dictate that it was impossible for man to predict minutely, 
with great variety of specification, and combining a multi- 
tude of improbabilities, the history for a single year of any 
person, or that of a nation. Now, when the heathen oracles 
were consulted, the responses given had reference not only to 
a short period, but were in the highest degree general and 
vague. They were only procured by great riches, and were 
surrounded by such difficulties as to be for any good end not 
only inaccessible, but useless. Among the heathen it is 
estimated that there were in repute no less than three hun- 
dred oracles; but an illustration of a few will give the char- 
acter of the whole. Their general characteristics were am- 
biguity, obscurity, and convertibility. Two instances in 
point will clearly show this. " When Croesus was to invade 
the Medes and Persians, he consulted the oracle of Delphos 
as to the issue of his expedition." The answer was, "that 
by passing the river Halys, and making war upon the Per- 
sians, he would ruin a great empire." What empire? his 
own, or that of the Persians? Croesus interpreted the empire to 
be that of the Persians, and consequently made war upon the 
Persians and lost his crown, and was upon the point also of 
losing his life. When Pj^rrhus made war upon the Romans, 
the same oracle was consulted; the answer was couched in a 
single line of Latin, but so equivocal in meaning, that it may 
be read either that " Pyrrhus should conquer the Romans, 
or that the Romans should conquer Pyrrhus." The issue 
is well known. Pyrrhus, interpreting the oracle in his favor, 



EVIDEXCE OF PROPHECY. 359 

returned defeated to his country after a long and disastrous 
struggle. 

Contrast the prophecies of the Bible. AYe have now refer- 
ence to fulfilled prophecy alone. Unfulfilled prophecy has 
reference to the mighty events of the future, and, whether 
clearly or obscurely given, is to be interpreted when future 
history shall become past history, and the world itself shall 
end. But, for our purpose, it is only necessary to speak of 
those prophecies already fulfilled, and to show by the exact 
correspondence of the events themselves the divine origin of 
the Bible. 

In considering miracles, it will be seen that a good end is 
one essential proof of a miracle. God is the author of order, 
of adaptation, of righteousness, and of wisdom. Conse- 
quently, when he works a miracle it is to some good purpose, 
to bring about some righteous and wise end. ]S'ow, the 
scheme of redemption from sin and its fearful consequences 
is an end sufficiently great, wise, and good to call for the 
interposition of miracle as an essential means for the accom- 
plishment of such an end. It is this which makes Bible 
miracles so probable, and because of which we are called so 
firmly to credit the evidence given. But propliecy is as 
strong an evidence of the divine origin of the Scriptures, and 
is as essential to carry out the great system of redemption, as 
miracles. A large part of the Bible consists of prophecy. 
Commencing with Adam in Eden, it ends only when another 
Eden, fairer than that which was lost, shall be ushered into 
the world, renewed by .the mighty power of God and regen- 
erated by the Eternal Spirit through all its countless millions. 
If miracles hold a most essential place in the Bible, prophecy 
holds a position as important, if not more so. It forms an 
argument of irresistible force to prove that God himself was 
the author of the Bible, making use in its composition of 
man as the instrument of his will. 

The great end of prophecy is to unfold the vast scheme 
of redemption by Christ in its commencement and in its 
termination. It is to unfold to man in every age the 
vast purposes of God's redeeming love. We therefore 



360 EVIDENCE OF PROPHECY. 

find that prophecy bridges over the whole interval of man's 
history. It begins with an Eden lost, and ends in an Eden 
restored. ^N'ow, as it is impossible for a human mind to 
conceive of the scheme of redemption as revealed in the 
Bible, it is equally impossible for any uninspired mind to 
give the history of that redemption ; and yet we find exactly 
portrayed in the Old Testament, centuries before the fulfill- 
ment, the character of Christ, the Messiah, and his future suf- 
ferings, death, and resurrection. What mortal man could fab- 
ricate such a character, or predict it ? What number of men 
could combine together to invent a story to be proved true 
ill after-ages in the most minute details, and, without collu- 
sion with one another, to find that story consistent in every 
part and realized in the whole ? There is not only an impos- 
sibility upon the side of motive, but of ability. For Moses, 
for David, for Isaiah and Daniel to predict the coming Mes- 
siah, accurately portray his character, the redemption from 
sin he was to secure to mankind, and yet each living in dif- 
ferent ages of the world, with no community of interest, no 
motive possible for deception, this must show them to be 
inspired by God. 

Consider that the one was the lawgiver to the Jews, the 
other a mighty king. Isaiah, according to tradition, was 
sawn asunder six hundred and ninety-eight years before 
Christ, and Daniel was thrown for his integrity into the lions' 
den. Can now those separate predictions, all verified by the 
events with so remote a separation of time and so great a 
diversity of circumstance, have their origin from no divine 
source ? If there is anything in which human ability shows 
its weakness, its utter impotency, it is in predicting things 
in the future. With all the light of experience, with all the 
aid of analogy, with all the assistance of history, philosophy, 
and science, nothing is so perfectl}' beyond the mind of man 
as any intelligent or minute predictions of events of human 
conduct to transpire a year hence; but that inability is aug- 
mented a thousandfold when centuries and ages must inter- 
vene between the giving and the accomplishment of the 
prophecy. Mohammed never based his Koran upon prophecy : 



EVIDENCE OF PROPHECY. 3()1 

the most successfal of impostors, he never presumed to tax 
the credulity of the darkest age of the world by any attempt 
at prophecy. So certainly would this fail him that he would 
not attempt that which, unsuccessful, would prove the most 
powerful enemy to his- cause. Why, then, did the Bible risk 
everj'thiug upon prophecy, even as miracles ? Why did the 
writers of the Scriptures attempt wonders so great? The 
reason is, God, not man, was the source of inspiration ; divine 
truth fears no scrutiny, however searching. The end for 
which all prophecy was given was to subserve the great 
purpose of building the temple of Christianity. In that tem- 
ple there was a use for stones of every variety, and every 
material that composed it; each had its separate position and 
its peculiar office. As one vast system, Christianity was a 
scheme to be developed gradually. Every age went to make 
up a part of that temple that was destined ultimately to 
be perfected in one glorious fabric of truth and love. 

Let us now consider some of the prophecies of the Bible 
as revealing its origin from God. We have seen how we 
may discriminate between true and false prophecy. The last 
is general, equivocal, ambiguous, and having only a short 
period for verification, and, above all, given under circum- 
stances highly favorable for conjecture. The true prophecy 
must be minute, discriminating, clearly corresponding with 
the event predicted, and given under circumstances where 
mere conjecture is impossible; and, to crown the whole, 
the end to be attained unto, as in miracles, must be shown 
to be wise and good, such as is worthy of God and useful 
to man. By such tests let us examine the prophecies of 
the Bible, to see if indeed they are genuine. We have 
spoken of the general scope of prophecy in its relation to 
Christ and his scheme of redemption. Before, then, entering 
upon the investigation of the more important prophecies, we 
will give, as an illustration of the minuteness of detail in the 
prophecies of the Bible, a few illustrations from those prophe- 
cies less noticed by the general reader. 

The destruction of the altar of Bethel was predicted in the 
year before Christ 975: ''And behold, there came a man of 



362 EVIDENCE OF PROPHECY. 

God out of Judali, by the word of the Lord, altar! altar! 
thus saith the Lord, Behold, a child shall be born unto the 
house of David, Josiah by name, and upon thee shall he 
offer the priests of the high places that burn incense upon 
thee, and men's bones shall be burned upon thee." An im- 
mediate sign was superadded in the withering of Jeroboam's 
arm, and in the rending of the altar, and the accomplish- 
ment of this prediction was in the year before Christ 624, 
and the interval between the prophecy and the fulfillment 
was three hundred and fifty-one years; Josephus makes the 
years that intervene three hundred and sixty-one. Thus we 
see in respect to time how remote the prophecy was from its 
fulfillment. Li the twenty-third chapter of the second of 
Kings we read in these words of the fulfillment of a pro- 
phecy more than three centuries and a half after its pre- 
diction. 

"Moreover, the altar that was at Bethel, and the high 
place which Jeroboam the son of Xebat, who made Israel to 
sin, had made, both that altar and the high place he broke 
down, and burned the high place, and stamped it small to 
powder, and burned the grove; and as Josiah turned himself 
he spied the sepulchers that were there in the mount, and 
sent and took the bones out of the sepulchers, and burned 
them upon the altar, and polluted it, according to the word 
of the Lord which the man of God proclaimed." Observe 
how exact was this accomplishment, although the distance 
that intervened was between the reign of Jeroboam and the 
reign of Josiah. 

At the fall of Jericho, "Joshua adjured them, saying, 
Cursed be the man, before the Lord, that riseth up and 
buildeth this city of Jericho ; he shall lay the foundation 
thereof in his first-born, and in his youngest son shall he set 
up the gates of it." This sentence was pronounced in the 
year before Christ 915. In the first of Kings, sixteenth chap- 
ter, we read : " In his days," that is, during the reign of 
x\hab, " did Hiel the Bethelite build Jericho ; he laid the 
foundation thereof in Abram, his first-born, and set up the 
gates thereof in his youngest son, Segab, according to the 



EVIDENCE OF PROPHECY. 363 

word of the Lord which he spake by Joshua, the son of 
Kun." Between the prophecy and the event there is a space 
of five hundred and thirty- three years. As an example of 
minute prediction and singular falfiUraent, compare the 
twenty-fourth chapter of Jeremiah with the twelfth of Ezekiel. 
In the former scripture it was foretold by one prophet that 
Zedekiah, the king of Judah, should be delivered into the 
hand of the king of Babylon, and behold his eyes, and speak 
with him mouth to mouth, and go to Babylon. In the latter, 
it was foretold by another prophet that Zedekiah shonld not 
see Babylon, though he should die there. But is there not 
a contradiction here ? How could Zedekiah be taken to 
Babylon, behold her king, and die there, and yet never see 
the city ? But the history of the kings of Judah, written 
without any design of pointing out the fulfillment of proph- 
ecy, explains this difiicnlty. Zedekiah was delivered into 
the hands of the king of Babylon, and beheld his eyes, and 
spoke with him mouth to mouth, not, however, at Babylon, 
but at Riblah. Then his eyes icere imt o?<^, by command of 
his captor. In this state he went to Babylon, and died there, 
having never seen the city of his captivity. 

As another illustration of wonderful minuteness as well 
as accuracy, consider the prophecies of the fall and destruc- 
tion of Babylon, the most ancient of the cities of the Old 
World. It became so famous after the time of Nebuchad- 
nezzar that it was called the Great Babylon, the glory of king- 
doms, the beauty of the Chaldee's excellency. With a circuit 
of walls sixty miles in compass, it was located in a most fer- 
tile plain. The city had a hundred gates, made of solid 
brass, and its mighty walls, according to Herodotus, were 
three hundred and fifty feet in height and eighty- seven feet 
in thickness, so that six chariots could go abreast upon them. 
How improbable, to human calculation, that a city so power- 
ful, the metropolis of a vast empire, should come, with all its 
strength, to naught ! But Isaiah, one hundred and sixty 
years before her ruin, when she was at the height of her 
glory, predicted : "It shall never be inhabited, neither shall 
it be dwelt in from generation to generation, neither shall 



364 EVIDENCE OF PROPHECY. 

the Arabian pitch tent there, neither shall the shepherds 
make their fold there. But wild beasts of the desert shall 
lie there, and the houses shall be full of doleful creatures, 
and owls shall dwell there, and satyrs shall dance there, and 
the wild beasts of the desert shall cry in their desolate houses, 
and dragons in their pleasant palaces." " How hath the 
golden city ceased I" "Her pomp is brought down to the 
grave." Sixteen centuries have passed since her foundations 
were inhabited by a human being. Deterred by reptiles and 
wild beasts, the wandering Arab never pitches his tent there. 
Once famous for the richness of its pastures, the shepherds 
make no fold. Reptiles, bats, and doleful creatures, jackals, 
hyenas, and lions, inhabit the holes and caverns and marshes 
of the desolate city. In the fourth century Babylon was a 
hunting-ground for the Persian monarchs. By the over- 
flowing of the Euphrates, pools of stagnant water are left 
in the hollow places of the ancient site, thus realizing the 
prediction, '' It shall he a possession for the bittern, and pools of 
water/' The manner of the taking of the city was no less 
clearly predicted. First, the river was to be dried up; " And 
I will dry up the rivers ;" and this is declared in reference 
to Cyrus, whom the prophet calls his shepherd; and by him 
the river was turned out of its channel. Then the brazen 
gates were to be left open. " Thus saith the Lord to his 
anointed, to Cyrus, — I will loose the loins of kings, to open 
before him the two-leaved gates, and the gates shall not be 
shut.'' By the oversight of the Babylonians, the gates were 
left open on the night of the festival, when the king was 
slain. IN'otice another minute circumstance of a prophecy 
given more than a century before its fulfillment. The assault 
was to be on two sides of the city, north and south. "One 
part shall run to meet another, and one messenger to meet 
another, to show the king of Babylon that his city is taken at 
one end,'' or is taken at " each end." Cyrus commanded his 
troops to enter in two detachments the city, by each of the 
sides through which the river passed, and to advance till 
they met in the center. 

Tyre was once the emporium of the world, the theater of 



EVIDENCE OF PROPHECY. 365 

an immense commerce and navigation. " Situate at the 
entry of the sea, slie was a merchant of the people for many 
isles, all nations were her merchants in all sorts of things. The 
ships of Tarshish did sing of her in the market, and she was 
replenished and made very glorious in the midst of the seas." 
It was of this mistress of princes that Ezekiel prophesied in 
the name of the Lord, " I will scrape the dust from her and 
make her like the top of a rock. It shall be a place for the 
spreading of nets in the midst of the sea." ISTot only was 
her utter ruin pointed out, but even the use that would be 
made of her site, and the kind of men that would inhabit 
her, were pointed out more than a thousand years before her 
complete destruction. Shaw, in his Travels, describes the 
port of Tyre as so choked up that the boats of ihe fishermen, 
who now and then come to the place and dry their nets upon its 
rocks and ruins, can hardly enter. The inlidel Volney says 
the whole village of Tyre contains only lifty or sixty poor 
families, who live obscurely on the produce of their little 
ground and a trifiing fishery. 

Concerning Egypt, once so mighty, it was said, "It shall 
be the basest of the kingdoms; neither shall it exalt itself 
any more above the nations ; that the pride of her power 
should come down ; that her land, and all that was there- 
in, should be made waste by the hand of strangers; that 
there should be no more a prince of the land of Egypt, and 
the scepter of Egypt should depart away." The most re- 
markable portion of this prophecy is that which declares 
that there shall be no more a prince of the land of Egypt. 
From the conquest of the Persians, three hundred and 
fifty years before Christ, to the present day, Egypt has 
been broken, she has been governed by strangers, and 
every effort to raise an Egyptian to the throne has been de- 
feated. Egypt has literally been, since that conquest, the 
basest of kingdoms. Says the infidel Volney, confirming 
every delineation of revelation, " Deprived twenty-three cen- 
turies ago of her natural proprietors, she has seen her fertile 
fields successively a prey to the Persians, the Macedonians, 
the Romans, the Greeks, the Arabs, the Georgians, and at 



366 EVIDEXCE OF PROPHECY. 

length the race of Tartars, distingaished by the name of Ot- 
toman Turks. The Mamelukes, purchased as slaves and in- 
troduced as soldiers, soon usurped the power and elected a 
leader. If their first establishment was a singular event, 
their continuance was no less extraordinary. They are re- 
placed by slaves brought from tlieir original country. The 
system of oppression is methodical. Everything the trav- 
eler sees or hears reminds him he is in the country of slavery 
and tyranny." Who but God could portray thus accurately, 
through ages of time, the history of these nations of anti- 
quity ? 

Where now is Babylon, with her hundred gates of brass, 
her lofty walls, her noble palaces, the wonder of millions? 
Where is Tyre, queen of cities, the haven of ships, control- 
ling the commerce of the nations? Where is Egypt, that 
land of the pyramids, where the Pharaohs reigned, the 
richest of countries, the granary of the world? Alas ! deso- 
lation reigns supreme. The proud monuments of human 
grandeur and wealth have crumbled into the dust. The 
warnor and the slave, the king and the peasant, the mighty 
and the obscure, rest in one common oblivion and sleep in 
one common ruin. But the word of God shall stand, and 
liis truth be fulfilled, though kingdoms fall to rise no more, 
though empires pass away as a dream, and all the glory of 
the earth come to naught. 

Every reader of history knows that after the deluge the 
human family proceeded in three great lines of population 
from the three sons of ^oah, — Shem, Ham, and Japheth. 
From these three sons the world was to be repeopled with 
inhabitants. The human family was to diverge in three 
mighty streams of population, whose waters were ultimatelj* 
to extend over the remotest regions of the earth, and yet 
each stream was to have distinct characteristics that should 
with infallible precision mark the history of each separate 
race to the end of time. 

Let us then observe if actual events in the history of the 
world have verified the predictions of I^oah to his three sons, 
as the representatives of the three great races of men who 



EVIDEXCE OF PROPHECY. 367 

have peopled, aiKldo now people, the earth. It is unnecessarv 
to dwell upon the circumstances of ^N'oah's predictions to his 
three sons. The common version of the Bible reads, " And 
he said, Cursed he Canaan ; a servant of servants shall he be 
unto his brethren. And he said, Blessed be the Lord God of 
Sliem ; and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarge 
Japheth, and he shall dwell in the teuts of Shem; and Ca- 
naan shall be his servant." Xow, Canaan was the son of 
Ham, and Ham, the father of Canaan, is mentioned in the 
preceding part of the story. In these three verses the 
Arabic version has "father of Canaan" instead of "Canaan.'' 
Some copies of the Septuagint have Ham instead of Canaan ; 
and, with great reason, the most correct reading of the Hebrew 
text has been believed to be, " Cursed be Ham, the father of 
Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren." 
But, however the Hebrew text may be translated, the import 
of the prophecy had peculiar reference to the posterity of the 
three sons, as the representatives of the three races that were 
to people the world. 

What has been the fuliillment of this prophecy? In the 
first place, the descendants of Ham, or Canaan, were to be, 
in their social and civil condition, inferior to the descendants 
of Shem and Japheth, and in a state of servitude to them. 
This was the general characteristic of the posterity of Ham. 
From Ham descended the inhabitants of Sodom and Go- 
morrah, the aborigines of Palestine, under the general name 
of Canaanites, whom the children of Israel, or descendants 
of Shem, expelled from the land and reduced to servitude. 
From Ham Egypt was settled, and most of Africa. Observe, 
now, the history of Ham's posterity from the earliest age to 
the present day. Says Bishop IN'ewton, " It is very well known 
that the word brethren., in Hebrew, comprehends more distant 
relations. The descendants of Canaan were to be subjected 
to the descendants of both Shem and Japheth : and the 
natural consequence of vice in communities, as well as in 
single persons, is slavery." The wars of the Israelites with 
the ancient Canaanites clearly show their subjeetion, through 
centuries, to the posterity of Shem. The land of Ham was 



368 EVIDENCE OF PROPHECY. 

subdued by the Persians, the descendants of Shem ; after- 
wards by the Grecians, the posterity of Japheth, and from 
that time it has been constantly in subjection to the posterity 
either of Shem or Japheth. 

The whole continent of Africa was peopled principally by 
the children of Ham; and for liow many ages have the better 
parts of the country been under the dominion of the Romans, 
then of the Saracens, and now of the Turks! Look to the 
barbarism, the deep ignorance, the innumerable savage tribes, 
the wide-spread bondage, and the fearful atrocities of the slave- 
trade, that for ages have existed in that ill-fated country ! 
How evident the fulfillment of prophecy! Of Shem it 
wtis said, "Blessed be the Lord God of Shem, and Canaan 
shall be his servant;" plainly intimating that the Lord would 
be his God in a peculiar manner. Consequently, we lind the 
Israelites the descendants of Shem, and that for several gen- 
erations the church of God was among his posterity, and 
especially of them, as concerning the flesh, Christ came. 

Of Japheth it was said, " God shall enlarge Japheth, and 
he shall dwell in the tents of Shem ; and Canaan shall be 
servant to them," or their servant. Was, then, Japheth 
more enlarged than the rest ? This was true in two respects, 
both in territorj^ and in children. 

Japheth's posterity included all Europe, and the possession 
of lesser Asia, Media, part of Armenia, Iberia, and Albania, 
and the vast regions of the ^N'orth which anciently the Scy- 
thians inhabited, but now the Tartars. The progeny also of 
Japheth excelled that of Shem, or Ham. It was also said 
that he "should dwell in the tents of Shem." In either 
sense the prophecy has been most literally fulfilled. In the 
former sense, it was true when the Sliechinah or divine pres- 
ence rested on the ark, and dwelt in the tabernacle and 
temple of the Jews ; and, in the latter sense, it was fulfilled 
when the Greeks and Romans, the descendants of Japheth, 
subdued and possessed Judea, and other countries belonging 
to Shem. 

Of Ishmael it was predicted, " And he will be a wild 
man ; his hand will be against every man, and every man's 



EVIDENCE OF PROPHECY. 369 

hand against him, and he shall dwell in the presence of his 
brethren." ^' And I will make him a great nation." Most 
literally has this prophecy been fulfilled in the posterity of 
Ishmael. They have lived to the present day by prey and 
rapine. They have ever existed a distinct people. Two cir- 
cumstances most extraordinary have marked the descendants 
of Ishmael, — a state of continual war, hateful and hated, and 
yet an existence in the presence of all other nations. While 
Ishmael's hand was against every man, and every man's hand 
against him, he yet, to the present day, has dwelt in the pres- 
ence of his brethren. The sword, that has devoured so many 
nations, has spared the posterity of Ishmael. In constant war- 
fare, the sons of Ishmael, free, independent, never subdued, 
have been the wild, untamed children of the desert. Not- 
withstanding the perpetual enmity between them and the rest 
of mankind, the Arabs, the children of Ishmael, have never 
been conquered. Alexander, the conqueror of Asia, in vain 
attempted to subdue them. The Persians, who preceded the 
Grecians, could never compel the nation, as a body, to pay 
tribute, or reduce the wandering Arabs to obedience. In 
vain the Komans strove to subdue the whole nation. Their 
success was only partial, and speedily followed by total dis- 
comfiture. Pompey, Trajan, and Severus, with great armies, 
attempted the conquest of this wild race, but only to expe- 
rience defeat. When we come to the time of their famous 
prophet Mohammed, we see the Saracens overrunning, in a 
few years, more countries than the Romans in many centu- 
ries; but while the Arabs were often masters, they were 
never slaves, and when their great empire was dissolved, and 
they were confined to their native limits, they yet preserved 
their independence against Tartars, Mamelukes, Turks, and 
all foreign enemies whatever. To this day the Turks, lords of 
the adjacent countries, so far from being able to restrain the 
depredations of the Arabs, have been compelled to pay them 
an annual tribute for the safe passage and security of the 
pilgrims who go in great companies to Mecca. 

ITotice the predictions in relation to Abraham, Jacob, and 
his twelve sons. 

24 



370 EVIDENCE OF PBOPHECY. 

Of Abraham it was said, " That in blessing I will bless 
thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the 
stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea- 
shore ; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; 
and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed ; 
because thou hast obeyed my voice." 

^ow, Abraham was born about two thousand years before 
Christ; and most literally have the predictions concerning 
Abraham been accomplished. First, as to his posterity. 
The family of this patriarch has from remote antiquity been 
extremely numerous ; from him are derived many tribes of 
Arabs, descending through Ishmael, and others by Keturah, 
to say nothing of the Jews ; neither has there been on the 
face of the earth, since jSToah and his sons, any man whose 
posterity is equally extensive ; any man to whom so many na- 
tions refer their origin. Others may have begotten families, 
but Abraham is the father of nations. IIow truly were all 
the nations of the earth blessed in the great fact that Christ 
was of the seed of Abraham ! 

^N'otice, also, the predictions of Jacob respecting his twelve 
sons. All were exactly carried out ; their separate conditions 
in the land of Canaan, also the superiority of Judah, and that 
through him in the line of descent the Messiah should come, 
were each verified by the events. How wonderfully has his- 
tory shown, in the relation Judah sustained to the other 
tribes of Israel, and that the scepter continued among the 
Jews, and that they had kings of their own nation in the 
persons of the Ilerods, the truthfulness of the prediction, 
" The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver 
from between his feet, until Shiloh come ; and unto him shall 
the gathering of the people be." It was only after the com- 
ing of the Messiah, the Shiloh of prophecy, that the final dis- 
persion of the Jewish race took place, and the dominion 
passed away with their temple and civil power. 

Consider, also, the surprising delineations of Daniel in 
respect to the four great empires of the earth, each to be 
erected upon the ruins of the preceding kingdom. l!Tow, 
Daniel was born about six centuries before Christ. At the 



EVIDEXCE OF PROPHECY. 371 

time of his prediction, Babylon, the metropolis of Chaklea, 
stood at the head of the nations of the earth; and vet, soon 
after, the glorv of it passed away. So minnte and compre- 
hensive were the prophecies of Daniel, embracing the history 
of Chaldea, Persia, Macedon, and Rome, so exact was the 
fulfillment in every particular, that Porphyry, the most 
learned of the enemies of Christianity in the third century, 
impressed with the exact correspondence between the predic- 
tions and the event, asserted that the prophecy could not 
have been written by Daniel, but by some one in Judea in 
the time of Antiochus Epiphanes; while Paine, famous 
for his infidelity, and no less so for his wretched end, con- 
fessed the authenticity of the book of Daniel. Paine denied 
the fulfillment. Porphyry the authenticity ; Porphyry ac- 
knowledged the fulfillment, P.aine the authenticity, "i/g 
taketh the ivise in their oirn craftiness." 

"Now, we conclude," says Calmet, "that if we find cer- 
tain events predicted long before they happened, — if they be 
so clearly described that, when completed, the description 
applies to the subject, — if they be related by persons entirely 
unconcerned in the events, and expecting to be removed 
from the stage of life long before they took place, then we 
demonstrate that some power superior to humanity has been 
pleased to impart so much of its designs and counsels as are 
referred to in such predictions." 

Calmet in his Dictionary of the Ploly Bible has, in Daniel's 
Prophecy of Four Kingdoms, represented by four beasts, 
given with great brevity and comprehensiveness their fulfill- 
ment. Let us observe this instance of prophecy compared 
with history, the chief incidents only being selected and 
num.bered. 

THE riEST BEAST. ASSYKIAX EMPIEE. 

* 

1. A lion, The Babylonian empire: 

2. having eagle's wings; l^ineveh, etc. added to it — but 

3. the wings were plucked ; Nineveh was almost destroyed at the 

fall of Sardanapalus ; 

4. it was raised from the ground, yet this empire was again elevated to 

power, 



372 



EVIDENCE OF FBOPHECF. 



THE FIKST BEAST. ASSYKIAN EMPIKE. 

5. and made to stand on the feet as and seemed to acquire stability under 

a man, Nebuchadnezzar, 

6. and a man's heart was given to it. who laid the foundation of its subse- 

quent policy and authority. 
(Dan. chap, iv.) 



THE SECOND BEAST. 

1. A ram, 

2. which had two horns, 

3. both high, 

4. but one higher than the other 
6. the highest came up last ; 



6. the ram pushed north west, soutji. 



did as he 
screat. 



pleased, and became 



PEKSIAN EMPIRE. 

Darius, or the Persian power, 

composed of Media and Persia, 

both considerable provinces. 

Media the most powerful : 

yet this most powerful Median em- 
pire, under Dejoces, rose after the 
other, 

and extended its conquests under Cy- 
rus over Lydia, etc., west; over 
Asia, north; over Babylon, etc., 
south, and, 

ruling over such extent of country, 
was a great empire. 



THE THIRD BEAST. 

1. A he-goat 

2. came from the west, 

3. gliding swiftly over the earth ; 

4. ran into the ram in the fury of his 

power, 

5. smote him, 

6. brake his two horns, 

7. cast him on the ground, 

8. stamped on him, and 

9. waxed very great. 



10. 



11. 



When he was strong, his great 

horn was broken, and 
instead of it came up four not able 

ones 



GRECIAN EMPIRE. 

Alexander, or the Greek power, 
came from Europe (west of Asia) 
with unexampled rapidity of success ; 
attacked Darius furiously and 

beat him at the Granicus, Issus, etc., 

conquered Persia and Media, etc., 

ruined the power of Darius, 

insomuch that Darius was mur- 
dered, etc. 

Alexander overran Bactriana, to In- 
dia; 

but died at Babylon, in the zenith of 
his fame and power ; 

his dominions were parceled among 
Seleucus, Antigonus, Ptolemy, 
Cassander (who had been his offi- 
cers), 



EVIDENCE OF PROPHECY. 373 



THE THIKD BEAST. GKECIAN EMPIRE. 

12. toward the four winds of heaven ; in Babylon, Asia Minor, Egypt, 

Greece. 

13. out of one of them a little horn Antiochus the Great, succeeded by 

waxed great Antiochus Epiphanes, 

14. toward the south and east, conquered Egypt, etc., 

15. which took away the daily sacri- and endeavored utterly to subvert 

fice, and cast down the sanctu- the Jewish polity, polluting their 

ary. temple, worship, and sacrifices to 

the utmost of his power. 
(Dan. chap. vii. 3-12.) 

Xow, Calniet makes Dauiel's vision of the Four Beasts in 
the begiuiiing of Belshazzar's reign, a. m. 3.1:48 ; and the 
time when Darius Codomannus was conquered by Alexan- 
der the Great, a. m. 3G74 ; and the time when Antiochus 
Epiphanes forcibly took Jerusalem and entered the temple, 
robbing it of precious vessels to the value of eighteen 
hundred talents, a. m. 3834. Thus, in one ease there is 
an interval of one hundred and twenty-six years, and in the 
other of three hundred and eightj'-six years, between the pre- 
diction and the fullillment. 

" When I behold a scheme," says Bishop Mcllvaine, ''so 
vast as to embrace all time, and yet so minute that it can de- 
tail the events of an hour ; so general that in a few lines it 
predicts the history of the four mightiest empires, and yet so 
particular that chapters are devoted to the history of one in- 
dividual ; so diversified in its materials as to be made up of 
contributions from men of all ages and minds during a 
period of four thousand years, and yet so identical that one 
spirit and one grand harmonious purpose animate the whole ; 
when I compare all this, arrayed as it is in the richest poetry 
and loftiest eloquence that eye of man ever read, with what- 
ever else in the world ever pretended to the praise of pro- 
phecy : I behold a grandeur of conception, a sublimity of de- 
sign, an all-controlling power of executiou, a unity and 
self-depending supremacy of mind which bespeaks the om- 
niscience and omnipotence of Him who ' icas^ and is, and is to 
come, the Almight}'.' I say nothing yet of the fulfillment of auy 



374 EVIDENCE OF PROPHECY. 

portion of this istupeiidous plan ; I only say, look at the plan 
itself in all its comprehensiveness and minuteness, and tell me 
if it be not utterly at variance with all human experience, 
and in itself perfectly incredible, that imposture should have 
conceived such a scheme, or should even have dared to com- 
mit its course to a venture that could only succeed by a con- 
tinuance of miraculous fortune through all ages of the world. 
Consider the plan itself, the various minds that carried on 
the succession of its several predictions, forming a line of holy 
men from the earliest periods of antediluvian histor^^ down 
to the last of the apostles of Christ ; see how they all agree 
in spirit and purpose, while yet so different in character and 
circumstances; see how they all unite in testifying of Christ; 
so that, as the last of them said, ' the testimony of Jesus is 
the spirit of prophecy;' then tell me how imposture can be 
supposed to have wrought unexposed for so many thousands 
of years ; how it could have chosen its agents out of forty 
centuries, out of circumstances so disadvantageous, and bid 
them embrace such an immense range of subjects for their 
predictions, and yet without any inconsistency, or want of 
harmony, or anything incompatible with the idea of one all- 
pervading mind having regulated the whole. I do not now 
say that so much as one prophecy has been fullilled; I only 
say, and I challenge all denial, that not a single prediction 
in the whole succession can be shown to have failed, or to be 
contradicted by the times or events to which it referred ; I 
only assert that, while many of the prophecies remain unful- 
filled, because the times they relate to have not arrived, a 
very great number must have either been fulfilled already, or 
have utterly failed ; and yet no unbeliever could ever put his 
hand on that portion of history which contradicted the truth 
of any. I ask you to remember this important and undenia- 
ble fact, and then say w^iether it is not most impressive evi- 
dence that another mind than that of man was the author of 
the prophecies of the Bible ; whether it can be supposed pos- 
sible, in the nature of things, that human ingenuity could 
have contrived a volume of predictions reaching so far, — 
extending so widely, — telling so much, — assuming such par- 



EVIDENCE OF PBOPHECY. 375 

ticularity, without having been contradicted by a single event 
in the history of nearly six thousand years." 

This eloquent argument of Bishop Mcllvaiue we believe 
irresistible in its appropriateness and its truth. The most 
ingenious skepticism cannot reply to the negative evidence alone 
of prophecy. Here are these numerous predictions in the 
Bible, extending over the whole interval of time that marks 
the existence of man upon this earth. Has a single predic- 
tion been proved false? Has one recorded miracle, one pro- 
phecy, been shown a failure? We challenge the whole col- 
lege of infidels to substantiate, by good argument, one solitary 
instance of failure. It cannot be done. The united skepti- 
cism of the world has never yet proved false a single recorded 
miracle or prediction of the Scriptures. Is not this negative 
evidence, saying nothing now of the fact of fulfillment, of 
immense value to prove the Bible from God? 

What greater illustration of credulity than to believe this 
mighty system of prophecy, in its unity and minuteness of 
detail, to be the work alone, through so many ages, of unin- 
spired men, and yet not be able to point out a single case of 
failure ! 



CHAPTER IX. 

PREDICTIONS CONCERNING CHRIST, AND BY CHRIST. 

As Christ, the Son of God, is the great theme of all reve- 
lation, so we find that all prophecy, in its main scope, centers 
upon him. Commencing with Adam, in Eden, in that 
memorable prediction, "The seed of the woman shall bruise 
the serpent's head," we find the prophetic delineations of the 
Messiah that was to come, growing clearer, more minute, and 
more grand as that eventful period drew nigh when the Son of 
God was to become incarnate and sufiTer and die for the sins 
of the world. Christ not only based the truth of his Messiah- 
ship upon miracles, but upon prophecy. He acknowledged the 
inspiration of the Old Testament ; he rebuked the Pharisees 
for corrupting it by giving undue prominence to the tradi- 
tions of the elders; he discoursed to the people from the 
ancient prophets, and constantly turned the attention of the 
Jews to their own Scriptures, as afibrding irresistible evi- 
dence of the truth of his Messiahship. In the same manner 
did the apostles of Christ refer to the Old Testament as the 
strongest proof of the divine mission of Christ. With sach 
a varied and great number of predictions in the Old Testa- 
ment in respect to Christ, we can only select a very few ; and 
the illustrations given will be to show especially one feature 
of prophecy, which is, minuteness of specification. We shall 
say nothing of the comprehensiveness, or grandeur, or great 
variety of predictions, in respect to Christ, that, commencing 
from the earliest age, reach to the last hour of time. It is 
enough for our purpose if w^e show from the wonderful 
minuteness of detail the impossibility of the Scriptures 
being the production alone of man. Daniel, five hundred 
and fifty-six years before Christ, determined the year of his 
coming, — when four hundred and ninety years should be 
(3t6) 



PREDICTIONS CONCERNING CHRIST, ETC. 377 

accomplished from the goiug forth of the command to rebuild 
Jerusalem. The accurate Dr. Prideaux has established that 
the event corresponded ^Yith the prediction exactly to a 
month. For in the month Xisan was the decree granted to 
Ezra, and in the middle of Xisan Christ suffered, just four 
hundred and ninety years after. 

Christ was predicted to come into the world at that very 
time when he actuallj' did come ; and, as a wonderful con- 
firmation of the truth of the predictions of the prophets 
concerning the Messiah, and the period of his entrance into 
the world, we find that there was, not only in Judea but in 
all the countr}^ round about, a universal expectation of the 
appearance of this Messiah. This is seen in the dismay and 
concealed envy of Herod when he interrogated the chief 
priests and scribes at what place the King of Israel should 
be born, and was troubled in his mind when they told him 
that their Scriptures said, in Bethlehem of Judea. It is seen, 
also, in his command to massacre the infants of that place, 
in the vain hope of including in the number the future King 
of Israel. The advent of Christ into the world was at the 
very time when the Jewish mind was most aw^ake to his actual 
coming, and when they thought that the period had indeed 
come when the predictions concerning him would be accom- 
plished. Christ was predicted to be betrayed and sold. Ex- 
actly the sum which Judas covenanted was foretold. Zecha- 
riah, personifying the Saviour, says : " They weighed for my 
price thirty pieces of silver." The very use of this money 
was foretold by the prophet : " And the Lord said unto me. 
Cast it unto the potter ; and I took the thirty pieces of silver, 
and cast them to the potter in the house of the Lord." Thus 
Judas cast down the thirty pieces of silver into the temple, 
and the money was applied to the purchase of the " potter's 
field." He was to be forsaken by his disciples : " I looked 
for some to have pity, and there was none ; and for comfort- 
ers, but I found none." The place of his birth was desig- 
nated by Micah: "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though 
thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of 
thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be the ruler in 



378 PREDICTIONS CONCERNING CHRIST, 

Israel ; whose goings forth have heeu of old, from everlast- 
ing." And in Matthevr we read: "isTow when Jesus was 
horn in Bethlehem of Judea." Christ was to be preceded by 
a remarkable person, resembling Elijah. And in Isaiah we 
read: *'The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Pre- 
pare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a 
highway for our God." In Matthew w^e find the fulfiUment, 
in the words : ''In those days came John the Baptist, preach- 
ing in the wilderness. of Judea, and saying, Repent ye, for 
the kingdom of heaven is at hand." He was to work mira- 
cles, says Isaiah: "Then the eyes of the blind shall be 
opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then 
shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the 
dumb sing." In instances too numerous to mention, these 
were the very miracles Christ worked. He was to be rejected 
by his own countrymen, says Isaiah : "And he shall be for a 
sanctuary ; but for a stone of stumbling and for a rock of 
offense to both the houses of Israel." Says John, in confir- 
mation : " He came unto his own, and his own received him 
not." He was to be scourged, mocked, and spit upon, says 
Isaiah: "I gave my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to 
them that plucked ofiT the hair; I hid not my face from 
shame and spitting." And we read in Matthew : " Then 
did they spit in his face, and buffeted him ; and others 
smote him with the palms of their hands." His hands and 
feet were to be pierced. In the Psalms we read: "The 
assembly of the wicked have enclosed me; the}- pierced my 
hands and my feet." This is the more remarkable, as cru- 
cifixion was a punishment not known among the Jews. 
He was to be mocked and reviled on the cross; and in the 
Psalms we read : " All they that see me laugh me to scorn ; 
they shoot out the lip; they shake the head, saying. He 
trusted on the Lord that he would deliver him ; let him 
deliver him, seeing he delighted in him." It was predicted 
that his garments were to be parted, and upon his vesture 
lots were to be cast. In the Psalms we read: "They part 
my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture." 
And in John we read of the fulfillment, when the soldiers 



AND BY C HEIST. 879 

said: " Let us not reucl it, but cast lots for it, whose it shall 
be," while his garments they divided into four parts. He 
was to make his grave with the rich; and we read of Joseph 
of Arimathea laying the body of Jesus in his own new tomb, 
which he had hewu out of a rock. 

In the Psalms w^e read : " It was not he that hated me, that 
did magnify himself against me ; then I would have hid myself 
from him; but it was thou, a man, my equal, my guide, and 
mine acquaintance." In John we read: " And Judas also, 
which betrayed him, knew the 'place, for Jesus ofttimes resorted 
thither with his disciples." 

In Micah we read : "They shall smite the judge of Israel 
with a rod upon his cheek." In Matthew we read: *' They 
took the reed, and smote him on the head." 

In the Psalms we read : " They gave me also gall for my 
meat; and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink;" and 
in Matthew we read: "They gave him vinegar to drink, 
mingled with gall." In the Psalms we read: "He keepeth 
all his bones, not one of them is broken." In John we are 
told : " These things were done that the Scripture might be 
fulfilled, A bone of him shall not be broken." 

In Isaiah we read : " He was numbered with the trans- 
gressors." In Luke we are told : " They crucified him, and 
the malefactors, one on the right hand and the other on the 
left." 

While in the Psalms we read : " Thej^ cast lots for my 
vesture," in John we are told the reason : " But his coat was 
without seam, woven from the top throughout." 

Consider the predictions of Christ himself. Christ pre- 
dicted his own resurrection ; and yet how impossible an event 
of this nature, unless he had been what he professed to be, 
the Son of God ! Christ foretold the rapid spread of the 
gospel; the persecutions of the disciples; the precise manner 
of Peter's martyrdom ; the continuance of John till after the 
destruction of Jerusalem ; the rejection of the Jews; and 
the bringing in of the Gentiles into the church of God. But 
let us consider the predictions of Christ in respect to the 
destruction of Jerusalem. History confirms, in the most 



380 ■ PREDICTIONS CONCERNING CHRIST, 

minute particulars, every prediction of Christ. Two great 
historians, Joseph us and Tacitus, — the one a Jew, the other 
a Roman, — both unfriendly to Christianity, confirm by their 
united testimony the predictions of Christ respecting the de- 
struction of Jerusalem and the subsequent condition of the 
Jews. The destruction of Jerusalem was in the seventieth 
year of the Christian era ; the prophecies of Matthew were 
published thirty years before fulfillment, and were declared 
by our Saviour thirty-seven years before their fulfillment. 
Observe that at the time of prediction the Jews were at peace 
with the Romans, the temple stood in all its glory, and 
nothing corresponded with the fearful calamities foretold by 
our Saviour. False Christs were to appear; and not two 
years after the crucifixion, Simon Magus was heard boasting 
himself as the Son of God ; and, as we come nearer the fatal 
event, the country was tilled with impostors, who deceived 
the people. Christ also predicted famines, and insiilences, 
and earthquakes in divers places. And historians speak of the 
raging of pestilences in various places, and earthquakes, as 
signs of the times. Christ foretold who the enemy should be, 
their fury and power, in the proverbial expression : " Whereso- 
ever the carcass is, there will the eagles be gathered together.^' The car- 
cass was the Jewish nation, given over as thoroughly corrupt 
and forsaken by God. The eagles were the characteristic in- 
signia of the Romans. The means by which Jerusalem should 
be taken were minutely delineated. "The days shall come 
upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, 
and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side." How- 
ever improbable these events, they actually took place. The 
inhabitants were kept in Jerusalem by Titus, with a wall and 
trench measuring about five miles in circumference. The 
ruin of the city was foretold in these words : " They shall 
lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within 
them ; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon 
another that shall not be thrown down." Jerusalem, with 
its massive walls, with its magnificent temple, was totally 
demolished. Terentius Rufus, a captain of the army of 
Titus, did with a plowshare beat up the foundations of the 



AND BY C HEIST. 381 

temple. Sajs Gibbon : "A plowshare was drawn over the 
consecrated ground, as a sign of perpetual interdiction." 

Christ predicted of the Jews : " They shall fall by the edge 
of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations." 
Josephus computes over eleven hundred thousand as de- 
stroyed in Jerusalem alone, and upwards of one million 
three hundred thousand who perished during these days of 
vengeance. Over ninety-seven thousand were carried into 
slavery, beside multitudes banished in different places. But 
there is another remarkable prophecy that has received an 
exact fulfillment. " Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the 
Gentiles,, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." E'early 
eighteen hundred years have elapsed since the destruction of 
Jerusalem, and observe that, during these long centuries, the 
Jews have not been re-established in Jerusalem. Romans, 
Saracens, Christians, Turks, have in turn possessed and 
trodden down the holy city, but the Jews, strangers in their 
native land, outcasts in the home of their fathers, have wan- 
dered over the earth, a persecuted, despised, but distinct 
race ; mingling with every nation, but uniting with none; a 
standing miracle of preservation, a perpetual monument of 
the truth of prophecy, showing the Bible from God, and 
proving conclusively the divine mission of Christ. 



CHAPTEE X. 

THE SUCCESS OF CHRISTIAXITY IX THE FIRST CENTURY. 

If the introduction of the Mosaic economy demanded 
miracles, the introduction of the Christian dispensation did 
much more demand miracles. There were greater interests 
at stake, more important ends to be accomplished, and far 
higher obstacles to encounter. The divine mission of Moses 
was principally to educate a nation in the unity of the one 
(jod, and preserve a chosen people from the polytheism of a 
world sunk in heathen idolatry. It was to keep for the 
appointed time the oracles of God among the chosen people, 
and secure a moral and political salvation to the lineal de- 
scendants of Abraham. But the introduction of Christianity 
was to break down the separating wall between Judaism and 
Gentileism. It was to teach new doctrines, make more clear 
the old, and embrace in the brotherhood of one faith not one 
nation only, but the world. It was not in Judea only, but in 
every land, that the true Avorshipers were to be publicly 
recognized as the accepted of God. The gorgeous ceremo- 
nial, the ritualistic service, of Judaism, had accomplished the 
end for which by God it had been instituted. All typical 
sacrifices were consummated in the great antitype, Christ, 
and the death of the Son of God had introduced a new era 
in human affairs. Here was come the mighty epoch sung 
by Jewish bards. Here arose in the world that event of 
transcendent interest that was to mould the destinies of every 
succeeding age. That miracles at such a period were neces- 
sary to confirm the divine mission of Christ, no infidelity can* 
have the hardihood to deny. That they w^ere really worked, 
history, both sacred and profane, combines to assure the 
mind. But there is another link to the chain of evidence to 
show the Bible the word of God. That link is the success 
(382) 



THE SUCCESS OE CREISTIAXITT. ETC. 383 

of Christianity during the first century that elapsed from the 
death of its divine author. The argument is simply this. 
The success of Christianity was of such a nature that no 
human power alone is an adequate reason for it. Conse- 
quently it must be from God, and therefore the Bible, that 
embodies all the truth of Christianity, is from God. Both 
must go together. The divine success of religion cannot be 
divorced from the divine record of that religion. If the one 
was of God, the other must also be of God. ^e do not now 
enter upon the subject of the inspiration of the Bible, but 
only the truth of the divine mission of Christ, and conse- 
quently the divine origin of his doctrines and instructions. 

Let us consider the circumstances that existed at the intro- 
duction of Christianity, and the obstacles that the disciples 
of Christ had to encounter, and see if upon the principles of 
human reason we can attribute the success of the religion of 
Christ to any other cause than the power of God, or a super- 
natural and divine agency. There are some things which 
human beings can and will do, and some things which they 
either cannot do or will not do. Men act from motives. Let 
us, then, see if the success of Christianity can be accounted 
for upon any other supposition than that Christianity was 
from God. The introduction of Christianity was at a period 
of the world, and among a nation, and connected with such 
circumstances, that it could not possibly have encountered 
successfully the obstacles opposed to it, had not Christianit}^ 
been from God. As the fabrication of man, a system of hu- 
man device, it must have been strangled in its very cradle, 
and expired long before it could have attracted the notice of 
the world. One great reason existed for this. Christ came 
in a way and under those circumstances that directly arrayed 
against him the whole Jewish nation. Christ assumed titles, 
propounded docrines, and denounced judgment, that made 
him peculiarly unacceptable to his countrymen. The learned 
men of the nation, looking only to the brilliant predictions 
in respect to his second coming in the Old Testament, had 
confounded his first coming with his second coming, and for- 
gotten the necessary humiliation of the divine author of 



384 THE SUCCESS OF CHRISTIANITY 

Christianity in the regal triumph of that more brilliant epoch 
of the world's histor}^ when Christ shall assume distinctively 
to the world's gaze the attributes of a judge and a king. But, 
more than this, the Jews not only had lost sight of the pre- 
dictions in respect to Christ's humiliation, but had carnalized 
all true ideas of the glory of Christ as a king and a judge. 
They fell into the twofold error of overlooking the humili- 
ation of his first coming and Judaizing his second coming. 
Upon every principle of reason, then, the mission of Christ 
to the Jews, if not divine, would be accommodated to the pre- 
judices and feelings of the Jews. If Christ was not of God, 
he neither would nor could have set himself against every 
prospect of worldly success, and perseveringly taken a course 
that ended only in ignominy and death and the deprivation 
of all that is held valuable upon the earth. One of two things 
is certain, — Christ was of this world, or he was not ; he came 
as the divinely accredited messenger of God, or he did not 
thus come. What worldly motive could influence Christ to 
take the course he did take ? All conduct must be based 
upon motives. If Christ was not divinely commissioned by 
God, he must be of this world. His mission, and his claims 
to be believed in as sent of God, must be either true or false. 
There is no middle ground between a heavenly Messiah and 
a worldly impostor. 

The last supposition gives us the absurd anomaly of an indi- 
vidual actuated by worldly motives, and yet in his whole life 
and death taking a course that in the clearest and most 
efltectual way was directly opposed to all worldly advance- 
ment, all that is honored or considered as pleasant and de- 
sirable by this world ; a citizen alone of this earth, influ- 
enced as an impostor by worldly motives, and yet in every 
act of his life taking the very course that no man of the world 
will take, courting poverty, suffering, disgrace, death, and all 
for that which was false, — an impostor doing that which 
promised neither the favor of God nor of man, which could 
secure neither the riches of time nor eternity. Human nature 
is made up of no such kind of material as that. Ko axiom in 
mathematics more true than that motives will correspond to 



IN THE FIBST CENTUBY. 385 

the conduct pursued. For a man from God to act a whole 
lifetime like an impostor, or an impostor like a man from 
God, — for a person influenced by worldly motives perse- 
veringly to live and die against w^orldly motives, — is the 
greatest of all absurdities. It is to suppose a criterion of con- 
duct that the human heart never can adopt. 

Bat consider the conduct of the Jews toward Christ. All 
their cherished hopes of an earthly potentate were studiousl}^ 
defeated by Christ. His cradle was the manger of oxen, his 
occupation that of the carpenter's son. His sympathies were 
with the despised of his race. His instructions constantly re- 
buked their pride, conflicted with all their ideas of worldly 
supremacy, threw contempt upon their priesthood, abrogated 
their ritual, and waged a constant war with their cherished 
exclusiveness as a nation. Christ promised nothing that was 
not most oflfensive to all influenced b}' earthl}' motives. A 
most expressive term embodies the appearance of Christ to 
his nation, — " stmnbling-hlock." The conduct of the Jews 
toward Christ evinced that he was looked upon peculiarly 
as a stwuhling-block. l^o matter how clear the proofs of his 
divine mission, that mission itself was hateful in the extreme to 
the Jewish nation, ^o one fact in history is so clearly proved 
as this. What inference more natural, than that if Christ was 
only an impostor and did not come from God, his mission 
would die upon the same cross that witnessed his death ? ^ot 
only is such an inference w^hat all men in reason would make, 
but an inference certain to be verified by the actual results. 
But what was the fact ? The success of Christianity was a 
success precisel}' under those circumstances that declared it 
to be from God. 

Amid a nation's scoflfs, in ignominy and fearful pain, the 
great author of Christianity had died upon the cross. Ko day 
of gloom like that in human history ! Christ's body was 
committed to the grave ; his disciples, disconsolate, had dis- 
persed ; few and despised, they possessed in themselves not 
one element of strength. Regarded as the victims of a mis- 
erable delusion, they were scattered, with no bond of union, 
and had no other protection than the world's contempt and 

25 



386 THE SUCCESS OF CHBISTIANITY 

their own poverty and destitution of power and fame. Who 
but God was to resuscitate those ahnost extino-uished fires 
of Christianity? It seemed as if every combination of cir- 
cumstance had been brought together to show the impotence 
of human power, and the perfect helplessness of the disciples 
of Christ in every earthly point of view. But mark w^hat 
followed. Upon the fiftieth day after the death of Christ, 
before a great assembly of Jews and strangers from other 
nations, Peter, one of. the disciples, arose and addressed the 
multitude. Notice the character of his speech, and its effect 
upon the assembly : 

" Jesus of ITazareth (said Peter), being delivered by the de- 
terminate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, 
and by wicked hands have crucified and slain : whom God 
hath raised up. Therefore let all the house of Israel know 
assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye 
have crucified, both Lord and Christ." 

Upon the supposition that Christ was of this world, and 
consequently not raised from the dead, what madness to utter 
such language ! How could the deluded disciple of a false 
Messiah boldly charge home upon the Jews a crime of which 
they .were guiltless, even the crucifixion of the Son of God, 
or dare avow an event so miraculous as his resurrection, if it 
had not taken place ? Surrounded by a nation of unbe- 
lievers, with the whole Jewish hierarchy as enemies most 
bitter, how happened it that Peter (if Christ was not of God) 
presumed to utter an untruth at the time when detection 
was inevitable and exposure certain ? But what was the 
result ? Three thousand souls were that day added to the 
infant Church. 

Observe, tken, the success that ensued from that day. 
Twelve apostles are sent forth, to achieve a far mightier vic- 
tory than the military conquest of the earth. They enter upon 
a warfare that brings to them neither riches, nor earthly 
honors, nor ease. And who are these twelve apostles ? They 
are not famed for learning, they have no wealth, they com- 
mand no force of arms. They enter upon this enterprise, ob- 
scure, friendless, simple, unprotected men, despised by the 



IX THE FIRST CEXTUBY. 387 

noble and great, unlionored by the multitude, and unloved 
by the people. What do they propose to do ? 

It is the subversion of Judaism, an uncompromising hostility 
to the idols of the heathen, an open, life-long war witb every 
embodiment of evil, be it in the individual or the state. 
What apostles of any other religion ever proposed to them- 
selves such a task ? And 3'et these twelve men, mostly fish- 
ermen, dare attempt a task more formidable than ever yet 
entered the heart of man. 

Consider the state of the world at that time. The Roman 
Empire was master of the earth. The imperial eagle floated 
on every banner, and the remotest regions of the civilized 
world acknowledged the supremacy of Caesar. But Rome 
was one vast superstructure of idolatry. The civil and the 
religious code were intimately blended together, and pagan- 
ism embodied in itself all the wealth and power of the earth. 
The worship of idols was the law of the state, and disobedi- 
ence was branded with infamy and subjected to torture and to 
death. It was also the most enlightened age of the world. 
Xot only was all the idolatry of the earth arrayed against 
Christianity, but all its boasted philosophy. On one side was 
all the formalism of Judaism, and upon the other all the 
grossness of heathenism, both arrayed in deadly issue with 
the new religion. 

Upon what principle, then, unless it be the supernatural 
intervention of God, an agency infinitely superior to human 
instrumentality, are we to account for the success of the 
apostles? Be it remembered, the weapons of their warfare 
were not carnal, but spiritual. They had no rank, no riches, 
no military power, to recommend them. They disclaimed all 
such instrumentality. Mohammed achieved his victories by 
the sword, and oflered a paradise of sensualism to his fol- 
lowers. But the apostles of Christ held no sword in their 
hands, and offered to their disciples in this life nothing but 
the loss of all that the earth esteems valuable or pleasant. 
They held up, indeed, a crown of beauty and glory; but it 
was of heaven, not of this earth. 

Such was the greatness of the task imposed upon the apos- 



388 THE SUCCESS OF CHRISTIANITY 

ties. Do they hesitate to undertake it ? Far from it. The 
very disciples that tied upon the trial of their Master, and 
the apostle who trembled before the poor words of a woman 
in the hall of judgment, boldly take upon themselves a war- 
fare against a world lying in sin, whose field of battle was 
in every land, and protracted as long as life itself; and what 
w^as their success? "And the word of God increased ; and 
the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; 
and a great company of the priests were obedient to the' 
faith." The Christian religion was not confined to Judea. 
Its disciples penetrated far beyond the limits of the Roman 
Empire. Multitudes daily were added to the church. In 
Home itself, in the palace of the Caesars, the gospel was 
preached. In famed Corinth, abandoned to every vice, be- 
lievers were found. At Athens the voice of Paul was heard. 
For the first time desert lands saw the banner of the cross, 
and lonely forests resounded with the hymn of Jesus. Before 
thirty years had elapsed from the death of Christ, churches 
were planted throughout Judea, Galilee, and Samaria, through 
Greece, the islands of the JEgcan Sea, the sea-coast of Africa, 
and far into Italy. 

The number of converts is described as "a great number," 
"great multitudes," "much people." The opposers of 
Christianity at Thessalonica exclaim against the apostles, 
" that they who had turned the world upside doicn, were come 
hither also." Demetrius complained of Paul, " that not only 
at Ephesus, but also throughout all Asia, he had persuaded 
and turned away much people." Jerusalem, the' chief seat 
of Jewish bigotry, had in it many thousands of believers. The 
Christians, by the testimony of Tacitus, had become so nu- 
merous at Pome that a " great multitude were seized." In 
forty years more we are told, in a celebrated letter of Pliny 
the Roman Governor of Pontus and Bithynia, that Christi- 
anity had long subsisted in these provinces, though so remote 
from Judea; also, that " many of all ages and of every rank, 
of both sexes, likewise, were accused to Pliny of being 
Christians." Justin Martyr, who wrote one hundred years 
after the gospel was first preached to the Gentiles, thus de- 



ly THE FIRST CEXTUBT. 389 

scribes the extent of Christianity in his time : " There is not 
a nation, either Greek or barbarian, or of any other name, 
even of those who wander in tribes and live in tents, among 
whom prayers and thanksgivings are not offered to the Father 
and Creator of the universe by the name of the crucitied 
Jesus." Of the converts, even Gibbon unites in this testi- 
mony : "As they emerged from sin and superstition to the 
glorious hope of immortality, they resolved to devote them- 
selves to a life not only of virtue, but of penitence ; the 
desire of perfection became the ruling passion of their 
soul." 

But not less remarkable was the success of Christianity in 
the first century than formidable the opposition encountered. 
Rome became alarmed for her idols. Superstition trembled 
on her throne. The great men of the earth were combined 
against the cross. Of the twelve apostles, all but one died 
martyrs to the faith ; and even the beloved John, in his last 
days, was banished to the lonely Patmos. 

The first apostles of Mohammed all entered into earthly 
honors and became chieftains over the conquered realms of 
their master; but the apostles of Christ were imprisoned, 
tortured, and persecuted unto death. Their baptism was a 
baptism of blood. To the contumely of a world, the bitter 
rage of incensed Judaism and pagan craft, were they con- 
stantly exposed. AVeary, abandoned, desolate, with hunger, 
and cold, and want, unrewarded by riches, ease, or honor, 
they pursued their toilsome journej^ over land and sea, — 
harmless as their Master, they found no resting place. They 
spoke before princes and kings; but paganism, wielding 
the power of the state, exerted all her might to crush the 
religion of the cross. Upon the rack innumerable men and 
women and children were tortured, — infants were cast into 
the tire, — all that the dungeon, the stake, the wild beasts of 
the circus could do, was tried; and yet victory and the cross did 
but go together. In prisons dark, in the raging flame, upon 
the bed of torture, before the ferocious beasts of the amphi- 
theater, did the song of the martyr arise, and a brighter crown 
than the Csesars ever wore glittered before the eye of the 



390 THE SUCCESS OF CHRISTIANITY, ETC. 

persecuted disciple of Christ. In his ear he heard a sweeter 
minstrelsy than ever echoed in Diana's temple or arose from 
the assembled multitude of the Parthenon. 

The imposing system of paganism fell before the purity of 
the religion of Christ ; and yet the only weapons were truth 
and love. Such was the success of Christianity. Reason as 
we may and believe as \yq may, the fact that it was from 
God, and not of man, was supernatural in its origin, and not 
natural, was accompanied by miracles and enforced by the 
eternal Spirit, is the only thing that can explain the mission 
of Christ, the power of his instructions, and the success of 
his apostles. 

Take away from us this argument, and these great events, 
never to be effaced from the page of history, will present to 
skepticism an anomaly of absurdity, a contradiction in all the 
principles of human life, so strange that even a thousand 
miracles would be far more easy to credit than a supposition 
so unnatural. 

The success of Christianity during the first century, under 
obstacles so great and in conflict with prejudices so invete- 
rate, carries with it evidence most conclusive of the divine 
origin of the religion of Christ. The age when our Saviour 
came into the world was peculiarly unfavorable to any 
attempt to palm oft' upon the credulity of the multitude a 
system of impostui e. It was just the age to test most clearly 
the reality of miracles, and displayed to the greatest advan- 
tage the truthfulness of the divine mission of the Son of 
God. It was the supernatural character of that mission, and 
its holy credentials from God himself, that carried with it the 
convictions of its disciples and made it triumph over all 
obstacles. 



CHAPTER XL 

ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE TO HUMAN NATURE AND THE 
CONSCIENCE. 

"When the great fact is shown that we need a revelation 
from Gocl, when the mind assents to this clearest of truths, 
then are we in a favorable condition to go directly to the con- 
sideration of the evidences of Christianity. Let us, then, 
take the Bible and carefully examine its credentials. Let us 
thoroughly investigate its proofs demanding our belief and 
proclaiming itself from God. The Bible invites us to such 
an examination, — it seeks to impose no belief that is not 
based upon the highest interests of our nature, and that has 
not to support it arguments of irresistible strength and im- 
portance. Unlike all pretended revelations, it is open to the 
freest and the most searching scrutin}'. Coming to us with 
its tremendous sanctions, it demands our most careful, most 
earnest, and most faithful examination. It has nothing to 
conceal in respect to its credentials. It seeks not to impose 
a faith without reason, or a practice without evidence. It 
calls not upon us to believe in its divine origin without 
giving the clearest proofs that it comes from God. Let us, 
then, commence the task of an examination whether the 
Bible is in truth a revelation from God, and an authoritative 
standard of belief and practice. But in what attitude shall 
we present ourselves ? Shall we go as learners ? Shall we 
come willing to receive the truth? Let us remember, we 
must be deeply committed to our own personal interests. 
Our belief or no belief will not change the immutable sanc- 
tions of the Bible. Our own opinions, right or wrong, will 
not alter one fact of inspiration. If the Bible is from God, 
it will stand immovable as the throne of Jehovah, even 

(391) 



392 ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE 

though generations of unbelievers treat it as a fable. But there 
is one argument, before entering upon the evidences of Chris- 
tianity, that we have the right to make the most of What 
may affect our personal interests for time and eternity should 
be attentively studied, and every evidence given for its truth 
should be received with candor. It should make a great dif- 
ference with a person who is told of the danger of a river that 
he must cross, and that of one which he has not to cross. 
Belief in the one affects his personal interests, but belief in 
the other does not. It is of little consequence what his belief 
may be of one river; while his personal safety depends upon 
a correct belief in the other case. Apply the same reasoning 
to the Bible. True or not true, our own interests are inti- 
mately involved. If true, it is the charter of a glorious im- 
mortality beyond the grave ; if not true, we are shut up 
alone to the unassisted light of nature, with all its deepening 
gloom and fearful intimations of ruin. Kow, such a subject 
is not to be treated as we treat the facts of science or the 
mere discoveries of human knowledge. lie who plows the 
land may believe in either the Ptolemaic or the Copernican 
system of astronomy, but he will get as good a harvest whether 
he believes the sun moves round the earth or the earth round 
the sun ; but it is a very different thing with him whether he 
believes the Bible is from God, or the offspring of human 
craft and simply a fable. As a wrong belief in the Bible is 
made a subject of condemnation, so the interests of the unbe- 
liever are affected for time and eternity by the fact alone of 
his unbelief. This is the reason why it is so needful for us 
to consider the evidences of Christianity. What conclusion, 
then, are we to arrive at in respect to the evidence that the 
Bible comes from God? Just the conclusion that we arrive 
at from any evidence in respect to those things which affect 
our interests for this life alone. We take such evidence as 
presents itself, great or small, and make the most of it. All 
human action in worldly things is based upon this. The 
practical rule of all our conduct is action, whenever the evi- 
dence of a thing exceeds the evidence against a thing. What 
demonstrative proof has the merchant, who commits his trea- 



TO HUMAN XATURE AND TEE CONSCIENCE. 393 

sures to the treacherous sea, that he shall ever see the vessel 
in which his riches are embarked? And 3'et how little evidence 
is necessary to induce thousands, with sufficient reason, to do 
business upon the great waters ! Of the millions who now 
travel by the mysterious agency of steam, how many person- 
ally examine that swift engine that brings them in safety to 
their journey's end? AYhat but probable evidence, and that, 
too, of a very limited nature, controls our conduct in most of 
the affairs of this life ? Principles of action that all in this 
world confess to be reasonable and o:ood, many disavow when 
a revelation from God is presented. In this life many scruple 
not to risk everything upon the feeblest testimony, and 3'et 
no testimony, however great, will induce them to believe the 
Bible. Every difficulty is magnified into a mountain, and 
the smallest objections are made to offset the most irresistible 
arguments in favor of a divine revelation. Believing in the 
great facts of nature upon evidence the most feeble, they dis- 
believe the God of nature in his inspired word upon evidence 
the most grand and conclusive. AVorks of human produc- 
tion they receive with unhesitating confidence, while the in- 
spired words of God are treated with contempt and neglect. 
Thousands admitting the existence and exploits of Alexan- 
der, or Coesar, or Xapoleon, with a confidence the most im- 
plicit, yet doubt or deny the divine mission of Jesus Christ, 
and his atonement for sin, although sustained by the accu- 
mulated evidence of centuries and made memorable by the 
blood of unnumbered martyrs. How shall we account for 
this ? Simply upon the ground that in one case our personal 
interests are affected, and in the other they are not. To admit 
the truth of the Bible is to admit its divine sanctions, and to 
believe that it comes from God is also to believe in the con- 
demnation that it pronounces upon its rejection. Here lies 
the secret of that infidelity that would do away with the 
Bible, and consequently with its sanctions. Here is the cause 
of that sophistry that would reject inspired truth because of 
the personality of its application. Yet the very fact that our 
interests are intimately involved in our belief or disbelief of 
the Bible, is the highest reason for a most earnest and faith- 



394 ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE 

fill examinatiou of its evidences. The very fact that our des- 
tiDy for eteruity may be at stake, is the most convincing of 
arguments to induce us to treat with candor every proof that 
the Bible comes from God. Here we take our stand. We 
say, be the evidences great or small for the inspiration of the 
Scriptures, that evidence, if good, should be received such 
as it is, and the most made of it. 

We come now to the Bible, and inquire if this book, w^iich 
professes to be from God, is adapted to our nature. Does it 
meet the demands of our moral constitution ? Is it in all 
respects suited to be our guide in this world to a better ? If 
not^ then the evidence of miracles and prophecy must, with 
us, have little weight ; if its representations of our state are 
erroneous and its general character destitute of purity or 
veracity, we say such a work cannot be the oft'spring of a 
good and holy God. God cannot be the author of that which 
belies his nature or throws contempt upon his attributes of 
truth and holiness. 

But we say more than this : it is impossible that the record 
of miracles and prophecy should, under such circumstances, 
be a true record^ as God only can work miracles and pre- 
dict events to take place hundreds and thousands of years 
before their actual occurrence. So, also, a Bible of the char- 
acter described would be impossible to be substantiated by 
genuine miracles and prophecy ; for God never would work 
miracles for an end unworthy of himself 

But if we find the Bible is adapted to our nature, as the 
key is adapted to the lock, — if we see that it presents a per- 
fect model of purity, love, and goodness for imitation, — if it 
reflects like a mirror our condition, and combines every ex- 
cellence to attract the mind, — if it suits us in every condition 
of life, and has in all ages and every land an adaptation to 
our necessities, — if it delineates God as the universal Father, 
caring equally for the humblest as the greatest of beings, — 
if it shows the infinite love of Christ his Son, and reveals an 
atonement for the sins of the world, — if it unfolds a redemp- 
tive process commencing from the earliest age and consum- 
mated in the salvation of millions of the human race, — if it 



TO nniAX NATURE AND THE COXSCIEXCE. 395 

discloses the law honored and the sinner saved, justice and 
mercy meetins^ toscether, — if at every period of our lives it 
has something fitted for our instruction, and can adapt itself 
to every variety of intellect, and give lessons of wisdom to 
the peasant-boy and the king, to the young and the aged, — 
if to every faculty of our nature it gives out a note of har- 
mony, and insinuates itself into all the intricacies of our 
moral being, then do we have the most convincing proof that 
such a book must come from God. 

Let us, then, examine the Bible, to see if it is adapted to 
our nature, — if it unlocks the door of our hearts, ^e 
will commence with conscience. Does the Bible meet 
the demands of our conscience ? Do its truths alone 
give peace to the conscience and a ground of firm support? 
Search the world over, and we find that no religion but 
that of the Bible can satisfy the conscience, or meet its 
boundless wants. It belongs to the intellect to tell us what 
is true, but the conscience has the prerogative alone of telling 
us what is right; its decisions are immediate and intuitive. 
"What is there in the Bible that the conscience can show is 
wrong:? Look to the morality of revelation. "What is there 
in it that conscience does not approve of? What purity of 
thought, as of overt act, is commanded in the Bible I What 
moral excellence is there that conscience does not respond to 
as most noble and worthy of God? 

Consider, then, in what respects the Bible is adapted to the 
conscience. It is peculiarly adapted to it in its decisions of 
what is morally good and right. It is not in the power of 
the intellect to make what is in itself wrong right, or to turn 
right into wrong. There is an essential difi:erence in our per- 
ceptions of what is true and right, and that which is false and 
wrong. The Bible is distinguished above all other books in 
that pre-eminently it is addressed to the conscience. It comes 
to this noblest of our faculties, and speaks directly to the 
deepest convictions of our moral nature. It delineates the 
character of God in such a light that conscience, if it dreads 
divine justice, yet responds immediately to the truthfulness 
of its exhibition. It delineates the purity of God and his be- 



396 ADAPTATIOX OF THE BIBLE 

nevolence in such a wa}' that conscience at once pronounces 
a verdict of approbation. 

There are certain moral duties so plain, so needful, and so 
imperious in their obligation, that when clearly exhibited to 
the mind there will be a response from conscience of appro- 
bation, from the most degraded even as the most exalted of 
men. Thus, sinceritj' and truth in our intercourse with so- 
ciety, — thus, self-denial for others' good, — thus, the possession 
of a just and benevolent spirit, — thus, the shunning of treach- 
ery, murder, or violence upon the property or character of 
our neighbor, — thus, uprightness in our daily intercourse, and 
freedom from avarice, revenge, and deceit, — thus, kindness 
toward the helpless, affection to parents or children, are duties 
as universal as man, all growing out of the great law of love, 
as boundless in its extent as the universe of God. 

All these duties are enforced in the Bible in a way pecu- 
liar for the greatness of their sanctions and the clearness of 
their application. What does conscience do when appealed 
to by these duties of the word of God? Conscience pro- 
nounces them right. It has no long process of argument to 
go through with, no complicated series of questions to ask. 
Conscience at once says. These duties are right, these duties 
promote our noblest interests, these duties we must comply 
with or we endanger our immortal happiness. ISTor does it 
demand a mind educated in the schools, or learned in the 
arts and sciences. In the heart of the most ignorant, the 
simplest, the rudest of men, yes, in the infant soul of the 
child just entering upon the stage of life, conscience, true to 
its high origin, true to the noblest prerogative of its being, 
tells us all that these duties are right, are good, — that they 
harmonize with our highest welfare, and will secure, if per- 
formed, the approbation of God. 

We ask, where in any book but the Bible is conscience 
so intelligently, so earnestl}^, and so effectually appealed 
to ? We ask, where among all the books of human origin 
is conscience so deeply, so truthfully addressed ? But there 
is another argument, of the highest importance, to con- 
sider What hook but the Bible imposes such sanctions 



TO BUM AX XATURE AND THE COXSCIEXCE. 397 

upon the conscience, demands so imperiously its cultiva- 
tion and the bringing it under the truth and all good in- 
fluences? What book but the Bible so widely addresses 
itself to the conscience under all circumstances and in all 
relations of life ? The conscience is that which tells us 
what is right Where except in the Bible do we find 
the appeal so constantly and so efiectually made to that 
which conscience tells us is right? Is the principle of right 
tiie principle of false religions? Is the conscience intelli- 
gently, truthfully, and rightfully appealed to in the pagan 
shasters, or in the pretended revelations of successful im- 
postors? Is the conscience, the noblest faculty of man, the 
thins: most sousrht after in the Koran of Mohammed? Is it 
esteemed chief in value in the Sibylline leaves of the Roman 
and Grecian prophetess, — the Druid rites of the ancient 
Briton, — the songs of the Scandinavian warrior, — the Bible 
of the Persian fire-worshiper, — or any of those pagan 
Scriptures that now hold sway over millions of the human 
race? Where except in the Christian Bible do we find the 
conscience treated as God intended it should be treated? 
Where except in inspiration do we find every sanction, 
every command, every duty, based upon the immutable, the 
eternal principle of right, — right such as the conscience feels 
and knows, — such as it recognizes immediateh' in every age 
and every land, — right such as the peasant-boy feels as keenly 
as the monarch upon his throne, — right so universal, so clearly 
defined, so pervading, so omnipresent in every action and 
thought, that among all races and in every country, in the 
earliest cradle of civilization as in the latest abode of re- 
finement and wealth, human nature gives but one response, 
and conscience pronounces but one unchanging verdict ? 

Where except in the Bible do we find conscience treated 
as the minister of God? Where except there do we find 
the unsullied, the perfect mirror of everj' moral excellence 
and of all right presented to it ? In every other system of re- 
ligion conscience is abased, is trampled upon, is perverted, is 
made the tool of designing men, is seduced into sin, is de- 
nied, or considered unworthy of attention. This mighty 



398 ADAPTATIOX OF THE BIBLE 

principle of human nature, to which all superstition owes its 
power, and by which all false religionsachieve their triumphs, 
is degraded from its loftv seat in the heart of man, is drugged 
with the cruel nostrums of impurity and deceit, is imprisoned 
in an iron cage, is made a perjured witness in man's heart. 
How unlike the treatment it receives from the Bible ! There 
it is recognized in man and woman ; there it is tenderly cared 
for; there it is cherished even as a plant of celestial beauty ; 
there it is talked unto even as a father converses with the 
child of his love; there a more than mother's sympathy 
greets it even in its wanderings, and the wisdom of God 
stoops to beguile it into the path of duty. There is the con- 
science of the repenting sinner received even as that prodigal 
wasw^elcomed to a feast such as the eldest brother never saw. 
But the Bible not only shows itself the best friend to the con 
science; it also reveals itself as its guide. It has already 
been seen that conscience in itself is not a sufficient guide, — 
that it needs something more clear, more imperative, and 
more effectual, to restrain sin. Where except in the Bible is 
there a guide for the conscience? Where is there in any 
other religion a directory of conduct so comprehensive, so 
universal, as is found in the word of God ? What duty so 
small that it does not enjoin? w^hat virtue so great that it 
does not include? As a system of morality alone, what so 
good as the Bible, or so convincing ? Where are sanctions 
so commanding, or rules of behavior better for this life? We 
need for the conscience an authoritative and an unerring 
guide. We need something that shall enlighten it in duty, 
awaken it to right action, purify it from corrupt desires, and 
make it sensitive to wrong. Where except in the Bible is 
the conscience able to find such a guide as shall deliver from 
all error, preserve from all corruption, make courageous in 
adversity, and pure in prosperous days ? Where except in 
the Bible are we to look for a guide to conscience so effectual 
as that in all relations of life and in every age it shall be 
competent for all wants ? If there was no other argument 
for the divine origin of the Scriptures, this alone is reason 
enough for a cordial reception. We would say that the Bible 



TO EUJIAX XATUEE AND THE CONSCIENCE. 399 

being so superior to all other productions as a guide to the 
conscience, this should be, until a better substitute was pro- 
vided (if such a supposition is possible), our practical guide 
through this world. Try any other key but the Bible, and 
in vain will it fit itself to the mysterious lock of the con- 
science ; in vain c^n any other system be found that shall 
meet the wants of conscience. Rather, all false religions live 
by the perversions of conscience. Like tyrants, they use 
conscience as a slave; they so misuse, or blind, or harden 
conscience, that it gives a forced acquiescence to errors the 
most fearful and practices the most corrupt. Conscience 
is compelled to walk barefooted over the iron spikes of 
superstition, and its lacerated body made to bleed at every 
step. 

There are some subjects connected with human interests 
beyond the grasp of the unassisted mind of man. One is, how 
man, a sinner, can be justified with God. Equally difficult 
is it for man to declare the future condition of the body 
after death, or to prove the immortality of the soul. Such 
subjects reach far beyond the efforts of the intellect. If the 
Bible comes to us throwing the brightest light upon the 
realities of the future state, — if it comes opening up the deep 
mysteries of our nature, our existence in this world and the 
life beyond the grave, — if it speaks of the resurrection of 
the body, and confirms the truth of that resurrection by the 
well-authenticated resurrection of Christ, — then such gleams 
of light into futurity, such glorious yet awful distinctness of 
delineation of another world, such an amazing insight into 
the deepest yet greatest of truths, can come from no human 
source. This we do know from history, even as from the 
clearest deductions of reason. We do know that where the 
Bible is unknown, where man is left unassisted by any light 
from revelation, these truths are not known. The deepest, 
the most wide-spread ignorance prevails upon subjects most 
intimately connected with man's welfare. The experiment 
has been tried upon a great scale, how much man left to 
himself can find out in respect to his condition for a future 
life. That experiment has uniformly been found to reveal 



400 ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE 

the human mind utterly inadequate to make known such 
truths or give any satisfactory evidence of them. 

In respect to the resurrection of the body, no conjecture 
of man has been made. This truth, when announced by 
Paul to the Athenians, was ridiculed as the wildest dream 
of the imagination. The Bible makes known not only new 
truths, as the resurFCction, God reconciled to man by the 
death of Christ, an immortality of soul and body, and 
the absolute creation of matter from nothing, but it throws 
the greatest distinctness upon those truths that the light of 
nature has dimly apprehended. Just as when the naked ej^e 
sees in the heavens the obscure outlines of stars, or gazes 
upon the moon reflecting the sunlight, and then assists its 
vision by a telescope, so that the stars appear clearly and re- 
volving planets are seen, and mountains and mighty ravines 
upon the moon's surface are discovered, — even thus the Bible 
throws light upon truths obscurely intimated by the unas- 
sisted reason of man. What in the physical world the tele- 
scope does to the heavens, in the moral world the Bible does 
to the mind and heart. Here alone we might rest our argu- 
ment for the divine origin of the Bible. We might say, if 
the reason of man has never found out such truths, and if 
the truths that reason has made known are revealed with a 
hundredfold distinctness in revelation, then certainly such a 
production must come from a higher than human source. But 
let us consider the Bible as adapted to the conscience. The 
conscience is a discriminating faculty. However perverted, 
it does not lose all of its power or susceptibility to good im- 
pressions. If treated as a slave, yet even when degraded by 
abuse, and manacled with the chains of superstition, it is not 
wholly deadened to every idea of right, or unconscious of all 
moral beauty and equity. Trembling it maj- be in every 
sinew and nerve, suffering it may be under the cruel lash of 
bigotry and ferocious ignorance, yet even in its lowest estate 
it will assert the high prerogatives of its existence and re- 
veal the nobility of its divine original. 

When false philosophy and the superstition of centuries 
have thrown their black foliage over the foundation of the 



TO HUMAS XATURE AXD THE COXSCIEXCE. 401 

greatest of truths, yet conscience, the wall of adamant, is still 
seen by the observer through the chinks and openings of that 
fatal drapery that surrounds it. Consider, then, the adapta- 
tion of the Bible to it. In the iirst place, conscience has a 
natural sense of justice: it feels that wrong should be pun- 
ished, and goodness rewarded: it feels that inequality of 
birth, or wealth, or station, does not give impunity to trans- 
gression, or make wickedness right. It instinctively declares 
that the man of rank and riches should not murder, or de- 
fraud, or in any way injure his neighbor, any more than the 
man of obscurity and poverty ; it pronounces the law right 
when its penalty is visited impartially upon all transgressors 
and none are suffered to escape punishment when condemned 
as guilty. What conscience declares is right to be done to 
others, it declares is right to be done to self. Take two per- 
sons, a man guilty of an atrocious crime and a man innocent 
of it. You cannot reverse the decision of conscience in these 
two persons. The feeling and the approbation of innocence 
cannot dwell in the heart of the s^uiltv man ; neither can the 
sting of remorse embitter the thoughts of him guiltless of this 
crime. 

Such being conscience, what is its decision in respect to 
the actual existing state of the world ? Here often crime is 
triumphant and vice successful, while virtue frequently is de- 
famed, and goodness pining in want. Here is the strongest 
inequality of merit, ignorance and vice advanced to wealth 
and rank, while knowledge and virtue are condemned to djes- 
titution and suffering. It is often true that crime will se- 
cure rewards that ignorance sighs for in vain. The natural 
feeling of justice, that conscience possesses, declares that such 
a disturbed state of things, such an inequality of merit, should 
be adjusted in another state. If here punishment and reward 
cannot be meted out to every individual, there should be 
another state, where the equilibrium of justice will be 
restored, where successful crime shall lind no impunity, and 
unrewarded virtue shall completely triumph. The Bible 
meets this discriminating sense of justice in conscience; it 
acknowledges the disorders of the present world, and makes 

26 



402 ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE 

certain another state where those disorders shall he rectified. 
Tims, as long ago as the time of Job, we read of a state of 
things like that which exists at the present day. Some, says 
he, " remove the landmarks : they violently take away 
flocks, and feed thereof. They drive away the ass of the 
fatherless. They take the widow's ox for a pledge. They 
cause the naked to lodge without clothing, that they have no 
covering in the cold. They pluck the fatherless from the 
breast, and take a pledge of the poor. Men groan from oat 
of the city, and the soul of the wounded criethout: yet God 
layeth not folly to them." " Wherefore do the wicked live, 
become old, yea, are mighty in power? Their seed is estab- 
lished in their sight with them, and then- offspring before 
their eyes. They spend their days in wealth, and in a mo- 
ment go down to the grave." 

" The earth," says he, " is given into the hands of the 
wicked, he covereth the faces of the judges thereof; if not, 
'Where and who is he ?' " As much as to say, this must be 
reconciled, whether we can reconcile it with the righteous 
government of God or not. Thus was Job perplexed before 
the light of Christianity. 

The Psalmist found no relief under the same difficulty 
until he went to the sanctuary of God and there saw the end 
of the wicked. Solomon, too, says, " Moreover, I saw under 
the sun the place of judgment, that wickedness was there, 
and the place of righteousness, that iniquity was there." 
Then, as furnishing the true solution of the difficulty, he ex- 
claims, "I said in my heart, God shall judge the righteous 
and the wicked." 

Thus revelation refers those cases which need adjudication 
to God and a future state, and thus complies with that princi- 
ple of equity that is felt in every conscience. In this respect, 
how peculiarly adapted is the Bible to the conscience ! It 
assures the mind of a judgment to come, and of the restitution 
of all things, when every difficulty shall be solved, and every 
doubt removed of equity in the administration of the world. 
But the Bible meets the demands of conscience in that it 
furnishes a perfect system of ethics, or moral duties. Con- 



TO HUM AX XATURE AXD THE COXSCJEXCE. 403 

science is a facalty tliat discriminates between right and 
wrong The Bible is distinguished above all other books 
in that the conscience finds in it a standard of absolute per- 
fection in every moral duty. It is alike comprehensive and 
particular, comprising all duties to God and man, and yet 
giving to each duty its appropriate value. It does not exalt 
a minor virtue into a superior virtue, nor degrade the higher 
traits of moral excellence to a subordinate position. It does 
not affix an undue prominence to alms-giving and neglect 
the duties of honesty and truth. It does not extol courage 
at the expense of humility, nor recommend fast-days and 
festivals to the detriment of industry and justice. It enjoins 
parental obedience and submission to civil magistrates, but 
not when that obedience conflicts with the higher claims of 
God and humanity. It instructs servants to work faithfully 
for their masters, and masters to treat their servants as chil- 
dren of a common parent and brethren in the Lord. It dis- 
countenances impurity in thought even as in overt act, and 
yet affixes the seal of the divine approbation upon the sa- 
cred ordinance of marriage, and carefully watches over that 
solitarv rose brou£cht from the trarden of Eden. It delecrates 
to man a sovereignty over the lower orders of creation, but 
refuses to call him good who is unmerciful to his beast. Thus 
the conscience finds in the Bible a perfect system of ethics, — a 
summary of duties that comprehend all things needful to be 
done in every relation of life. But, what is of more importance, 
all these duties have their proper place. Like some beauti- 
ful temple of harmonious proportion, the ethics of the gos- 
pel never conflict with each other; from the foundation to the 
dome, every stone is where it should be, and every column 
preserves its proper symmetry. Go round about that temple. 
examine every separate part aud the whole collectively, and 
the artist eye of an angel can neither discover a fault nor re- 
commend an additional beauty. For fallen man the morality 
of the Bible is just what it should be, and no better can be 
made or even imagined. The ethics of the Bible are im- 
measurably superior to those of any other book: confirming 
all the good the light of nature discovers, it adds to it a 



404 ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE 

morality peciiliarl}' its own, and blends both together in a 
way impossible to be improved upon. What better code of 
moralit}' than the ten commandments ? What discourse 
more excellent than Christ's sermon on the Mount ? History 
has shown us how distorted a morality human ingenuity can 
get up when it attempts to improve upon the Bible, — when 
it sets itself up to be wiser than God. Thus, for ages, celi- 
bacy was recommended as the pattern of all goodness, and 
marriage contemned even when monkish presumption dared 
not to call it wrong ; but the fruit of this exti^a virtue was wide- 
spread dissoluteness, and the sacrifice for an imaginar}" excel- 
lence of the noblest of social blessings, as well as the most 
commanding of domestic duties. Thus, for ages, fasts and 
penances were unduly extolled, and an exaggerated merit put 
upon the laceration of the body and the denying the lawful 
claims of our physical nature ; and the consequence was* a 
Pharisaical righteousness and the forgetting of the chief duties 
of the gospel. Thus, for ages, festival days and pilgrimages 
were observed; and the fruit was universal idleness and pov 
erty. Thus, in times past and at the present day, socialistic 
ideas of civil government, of servitude, of the domestic rela- 
tion, and of the free community of persons and goods, have 
prevailed, and the maxims of the gospel have been derided 
as antiquated and oppressive ; but the fruit of all this progress 
beyond the Bible has been found to be only strife, impurity, 
and dissoluteness. So exactly adapted is the morality of the 
gospel to conscience and the state of man as a follen being, 
that every attempt to improve upon the Bible in its represen- 
tations of human nature, in any of its maxims, or the duties 
imposed upon us as members of the family or the state, has 
invariablj^ proved a failure. The ordinances of God have 
shown themselves better and wiser than the devices of man. 
If, now, the Bible is not from God, why is it that the con- 
science finds in it a truthfulness, a propriety, an adaptation, 
and an excellence in the morality enjoined that it finds in no 
other book ? How happens it that, if this is a human pro- 
duction, its ethics are so superior, that the greatest skeptics 
speak of it in its moral duties as the best, the purest, the 



TO HUMAN NATURE AND THE CONSCIENCE. 405 

noblest of books ? How happens it that a volume that 
consists of sixty-six separate books, of which the book of 
Psalms contains no less than one hundred and fifty dis- 
tinct compositions, — a volume that contains many hundred 
separate treatises, having no other connection with each 
other than that they treat of the same general matters or 
were composed bj- the same persons, — a volume of differ- 
ent compositions, that occupied a period of fifteen or six- 
teen centuries in their production, and which professes to 
cover, historically and prophetically, the whole period of 
man's existence upon this earth, — a volume embracing every 
variety of style, — whose principal authors were about thirty, 
not including those under the general division, from every 
rank in life, kings, shepherds, magistrates, soldiers, scholars, 
judges, priests, generals, fishermen, farmers, tax-gatherers, — 
a volume with ethics so pure, with no collision of facts, no 
disagreement of truths, alike the most diversified and yet the 
most unique, — a volume embracing the whole circle of duties 
to God and man, adjusted for every age, appropriate for all 
countries, alike good for the peasant-boy and the king, the 
refined and the rustic, the rich and the poor, — a guide alike 
excellent for every conscience, suitable for all times and oc- 
casions, — how happens it that such a volume should spring 
from human contrivance and be alone the offspring of human 
learning? How happens so great an agreement with so 
wonderful a diversity of subjects ? IsTo other such book is 
there in all the libraries of the world. How wonderful that 
moral duties should be so delineated and enforced as to be 
recognized appropriate and excellent by the conscience in all 
ages and countries ! If ethics so pure, so universal, so com- 
manding, were only of human origin, would it not be a mira- 
cle of strangeness more wonderful than all other miracles 
together? If the writers of these books were honest men, 
they would not palm off their compositions as divine, if 
they were human ; and if these men were dishonest, they 
could not. Take which supposition we please, and we arrive 
at the same conclusion: honesty would not, and dishonesty could 
not, compose the Scriptures. 



406 ADAPTATIOX OF THE BIBLE 

There is an incidental proof of the divine origin of the 
Bible deserving of high consideration. This proof consists 
in the fact that, while so perfectly adapted to the conscience 
as a discriminating power, it never attempts to secure an in- 
fluence over the conscience by any of those methods so 
common in false religions. Every system of human inven- 
tion is local in its nature, and consults present advantage 
rather than future success. Thus we find all the common 
ideas of science and art prevailing at the time the pretended 
revelation is made, eagerly made use of as available to secure 
a power over the conscience. 'Eo matter whether those pop- 
ular ideas are true or false, no matter whether they corre- 
spond to actual facts in science or not, they are embodied in 
all the antichristian Bibles. Thus it is only necessary to give 
the actual truths of natural science and philosophy to prove 
false the heathen shasters, and every production of man pre- 
suming to claim a divine origin. A correct demonstration 
in astronomy or chemistry will undermine the whole fabric 
of any book professing to be a revelation from God, other 
than the Bible. 

What is the course pursued in the Scriptures? Had the 
actual facts of science been made known, the ages in which 
the different treatises of the Bible were written would not 
have been prepared to receive them ; and had the false ideas 
been communicated, after-ages of infidels would have gloried 
over the fallibility of the Bible, the conscience would have 
been imposed upon by untruths, and the proud philosophers 
of the present day would have pointed with a skeptical sneer 
to the Bible as a musty collection of antiquated notions, 
unfit to be received by the more advanced children of civil- 
ization and knowledge. 

But what is the fact? "With a studied reserve and a 
guarded caution impossible for uninspired men to exercise, 
all the compositions of the Bible were made. The unavoid- 
able prejudices and feelings of ages less enlightened found 
nothing in the Bible to contradict directly the prevailing 
opinions in astronomy, chemistry, and geology, and at the 
same time nothing to substantiate or confirm those opinions. 



TO HUMAX XATCRE AXD THE COX.^CIEXCE. 407 

The language of popular life, even as at present, was made 
use of, but iu no such sense as to authorize the belief of a 
single false statement in science, history, or phj'sical geogra- 
phy. Here consists the immeasurable superiority of the 
Scriptures to every human production. Take any history, 
or important composition of poetry or philosophy of any 
one age, and the prevailing errors of the day are found inter- 
woven into it. Xot so, however, in the Bible ; adapted 
to the age in which each separate treatise was written, ex- 
tending over a period of sixteen centuries, it has in it not 
one false statement in science, — it seeks to impose upon the 
conscience not a single influence that owes its charm to error. 
It is as true to the intellectual as to the moral nature ; and 
every research of the present day, in every department of 
knowledge, is forced to acknowledge the consummate wisdom 
that dictated the writings of the Bible ; a wisdom infinite in 
foresight, and not less infinite in beauty of adaptation ; a wis- 
dom so great that the revelation of the remotest age of anti- 
quity can be adjusted to the present day, and from which not 
a single chapter can be spared without a detriment to the 
whole. 

But the Bible is not only adapted to the conscience in that, 
unlike false religions, it seeks to secure no influence over it 
by error, but especially in that it aflbrds to the conscience 
the only firm and the only good foundation to rest upon. 
There is that in man's nature that points to something higher 
than man, higher than law itself, higher than all created 
power, as necessary to save from sin. There is that in con- 
science that cannot be satisfied with the imposing glare of 
religious deceit, or the most attractive mummeries of super- 
stition. There is a feelins^ in conscience that can find no 
resting-place except it be in the. cross of Christ. As the 
dove sent out of the ark by Xoah flew restless over the waters 
of a drowning world, and found no green spot to repose her 
wearied body amid the wide-spread desolations of the flood, 
so conscience can find no resting-place in false religions, and 
wanders unsatisfied among the ruins of a fallen nature. It 
is in the Bible alone that the conscience finds its deepest 



408 ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE, ETC. 

wants met. Here is found that perfect kej^ that opens the 
door of human nature. What more convincing argument 
to reveal its origin from God ? 

Why for so many ages, if the Bible is not divine, have not 
human wisdom and learning found out something adapted 
to the conscience ? How happened it, if the Bible is not 
from God, that there sprang up amid the mountains of Judea, 
amid a nation comparatively obscure and in every respect 
inferior to the renowned nations of antiquity in learning, 
in refinement, in science, in philosophy, and art, a book 
adapted to the conscience in all ages and in every land ; a 
book so superior that it has triumphed over everj' device of 
superstition and every argument of infidelity; so superior 
that conscience finds alone in it a perfect standard of conduct 
and yet the only panacea for sin ; so superior that it has 
found its way to millions of firesides and is bowed to as di- 
vine alike in the palace and the hovel ; so superior that it 
has supplanted the proudest systems of superstition, and 
formed the foundation of the highest civilization of modern 
times ; so superior that it has commanded the respect and 
obedience of the wisest and best of every age, and for whose 
preservation the blood of countless martyrs has flowed, and 
would yet flow, if necessary, to the last hour of time ? 



CHAPTER XII. 

ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE TO THE AFFECTIOXS AND THE WILL. 

The popular language of the word of God in respect to 
the affections will be found, upon a careful examination, to 
embody more truth in the relation which the affections sus- 
tain to the intellect and the will, than can be found in any 
metaphysical treatise. The difficulty often in metaphysical 
reasoning is that the will is divorced from the affections and 
considered too exclusively the moving agent of human con- 
duct; but, in fact, the affections have as much to do with our 
actions as the will has. The will is the executive agent, and 
its decisions control the conduct: without volition we will 
never act. But what is it, in the main, that leads to volition ? 
what is it that makes the will decide upon any course of life ? 
Evidently, the affections : lying back of the will, they yet 
most powerfully influence it. Whenever the will attempts 
to act contrary to the affections, the action is constrained, re- 
luctant, and cheerless. The outward obedience may be ren- 
dered, but inwardly there is something that hangs like a 
weight upon the will; that something acts constantly as a 
restraining power, ever increasing in energ}^, until, like a roll- 
ing ball under the influence of ceaseless friction, the will at 
length stops. 

Thus difficult is it in human conduct to act as^ainst the 
affections. The intellect, the conscience, and the will may 
all be upon one side, and yet if the affections are upon the 
other side they will turn the balance. How often is this 
seen in human life ! How often is it true that the lover of 
strong drink, or of any other vice, has turned back again, 
against his better judgment, against his conscience, and made 
even the opposing will at last to yield ! Thus, in the Bible we 
read, " With the heart man believeth unto righteousness," 
rather than with the will. The heart is the seat of the affec- 

(409) 



410 ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE 

tions, and it is always addressed in the Bible in preference to 
the will: that right, and the will is right, — that wrong, and 
the will must be wrong. The overlooking of this fact has 
often occasioned great error in presenting the subject of reli- 
gion to the mind. It is sometimes said that conversion con- 
sists in volition; but conversion consists in a change of heart 
rather than in ric^ht willins^. 

IN'o difficulty about tlie will, if the heart is right; but unless 
that is so, the will is more unmanageable than any mind can 
conceive of. Its volitions are cheerless, reluctant, inconstant, 
and feeble. There is a moral gravitation in the wrong di- 
rection, a principle of vicious attraction that invariably over- 
comes at last. Overt acts may indeed be performed, but a 
loveless obedience is soon converted into open rebellion. 
With the affections against the will, there is an under-current 
of unremitting energy; nothing can effectually stem that 
current. The will may try to do it, but every moment it 
grows weaker. Before the will can grow daily in strength, 
until it becomes fixed into habit, and habit becomes con- 
verted into nature, there must be the turning of the affec- 
tions. If the will has the affections upon its side, it will 
triumph over all obstacles; if against it, the smallest impedi- 
ments will be enough to prevent success. When the serpent 
in the garden tempted Eve, the appeal first was made to the 
understanding. The devil, skilled in the science of war, 
stormed first the castle that guarded the entrance to the 
affections. Says the tempter, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall 
not eat of every tree of the garden ? As much as to say, 
Is it possible that God, a good being, could have prohibited 
a single tree in Eden ? Here doubt of the goodness and ve- 
racity of God was suggested. Then comes the bold avowal, 
" Ye shall not surely die." With the principle of confidence 
in God destroyed, the next step to be taken is the securing 
of the understanding. The tempter now appeals directly to 
the strongest principle of human nature, — the love of knowl- 
edge, or curiosity, and the love of ambition, or aggran- 
dizement. " For God doth know that in the day 3'e eat 
thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as 
gods, knowing good and evil." 



TO THE AFFECTIONS AND THE WILL. 411 

The way is now fully open for the conquest of the affec- 
tions; these must lirst be gained over to the side of sin before 
there is a direct action of the will. "And when the woman 
saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant 
to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she 
took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her 
husband with her, and he did eat." 

Thus we see that the affections were appealed to in a 
threefold way. The tree was good for food ; that carried tlio 
appetites: it was pleasant to the eyes; that gained over the 
love of the beautiful : it was a tree to be desired to make one 
wise; that secured the love of knowledge. Here is a strik- 
ing illustration of the manner in wdiich the affections are 
appealed to. The affections have to do with three parts of 
our nature, — the sensuous, the aesthetic, and the intellectual. 
One is the seat of the appetites, the other of the taste, and 
the last of the reason. ]S"o sooner had these susceptibilities 
of our nature been gained, than we read of the overt act 
which consummated the decision of the will, in the words, 
"She took of the fruit thereof, and did eat." 

Let us, then, consider in what respect the Bible is adapted 
to the affections. The affections are the emotional part of 
our nature, intimatel}' associated with the body, the taste, 
and the mind, — sensuous, aesthetic, and intellectual. Let 
us consider tirst the sensuous part of our nature. The 
body, since the fall, with the animal wants has stepped be- 
yond its legitimate sphere and encroached upon the nobler 
part of man, the conscience and the mind. Appetite has 
made man, created in the image of God, the slave of unlaw^- 
ful desires. What is the result? The appetites getting 
the ascendency over the conscience and the reason, the 
affections are carried away by the sensuous part. In the 
aesthetic and intellectual nature of man, also, all the suscepti- 
bilities being upon the side of sin, the will and the con- 
science are weakened and depraved. Before the fall the 
affections were exactly balanced, and ever acted in harmony; 
but since the fall the sensuous part of the affections has pre- 
ponderated over the nobler part, and consequently the result 



412 ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE 

has been that sin, exercising a control over the affections in 
every part, has, through the heart, made tributary to it the 
v^ill. Consider, then, the adaptation of the Bible to the 
affections. In the first place, the Bible regulates the affec- 
tions. The sensuous love that exists at the expense of the 
aesthetic and intellectual is made subordinate to the nobler 
principles of our nature. The gratification of the appetite 
is considered inferior to the love of that which is beautiful, 
or noble, or refined, or intellectual. Those mental and moral 
traits that ally man to an angel are deemed infinltel}' superior 
to those animal propensities that are common to the brutes. 
But the Bible especially cultivates that part of the affections 
which is most intimately connected with the conscience. 
Thus, when the mind perceives some good action, some noble 
or worthy deed in another, there is a feeling of moral appro- 
bation. The afi'ections are so constituted as to feel resent- 
ment at w^rong conduct, while they can be awakened to a 
high degree of pleasure when there is the consideration of 
some illustrious act that confers lasting benefit upon man- 
kind. They can also be aroused to the deepest feeling of 
contempt or hatred of some atrocious deed of treachery or 
crime. Where except in the Bible is there such an appeal 
made to the moral feelings ? Where are the affections in 
any other book so often, so earnestly, and so eftectually ad- 
dressed in all that exalts or ennobles man ? Here is man, 
with a sensuous nature that from the fall constantly seeks, 
with its passions and appetites, to encroach upon the nobler 
class of affections. How is that ever-increasing tendency to 
the undue gratification of sense to be obviated ? Evidently, 
by the most skillfully adjusted sj'stem of motives to those 
affections which comprehend the love of the beautiful, the 
wise, and the good ; which are associated peculiarly with the 
intellect and the moral sense. The affections find the Bible 
in every respect adapted to every existing want of the social 
and family relation. No religion like Christianity so guards 
and honors the relation of father and mother, or brother and 
sister. Rather, other religions leave the most sacred ties of 
nature exposed to the rude inroads of enemies; other re- 



TO THE AFFECTIONS AND THE WILL. 413 

ligious pull down those barriers that God in nature has 
erected to preserve the purity of the domestic institution ; 
other religions foster those appetites that constantly need the 
most vigilant caution to restrain. The pagan shasters and 
the Koran of Mohammed have no effectual antidote to the 
immoderate indulgence of the senses. Rather, in their delin- 
eations of heathen gods or the paradise of the Mohammedan, 
little or no restraint is exercised over the appetites. This 
was a part of human nature too difficult to manage. Conse- 
quently, we find license is given to those passions that, unlaw- 
fully indulged in, do more to injure the moral and intellectual 
part of man than all other sins together. Here the profound 
wisdom of Christianity is displayed to most advantage. It 
seeks not to destroy the passions, but to regulate them. It 
keeps the river of sense within its natural bounds, and 
throws up an embankment when its swelling waters would 
deluge the land. By appealing more to the aesthetic and 
intellectual part of the affections, it nicely preserves the 
equipoise that ever should exist between the varied classes 
of feelings that agitate the soul. Thus we find that the 
affections have in the Bible their highest security and their 
noblest development. "Whatever is pure, or generous, or 
noble, or good, whatever tends to repress what is low, or 
deo^radino; to a human beins:, finds in revelation a most 
effectual aid. 

The Bible is especially adapted to the affections in the reli- 
gious sensibilities. Man has moral feelings as well as appe- 
tites : one allies him with the angels, the other with the brutes. 
Thus, in the heart of man there are two classes of feelings, 
each pulling in an opposite direction. That which pertains 
to the moral nature speaks of God, of the future world, of 
right and wrong, and of human accountability. That which 
pertains to the sense urges on to sensuous gratification in its 
varied forms. It is the preponderance of this part of the 
affections in the heart of man that leads him so constantly 
into sin ; with mighty attraction it draws all the nobler feelings 
after it, until by successive stages of debasement there seems 
to be obliterated, except in the intellect, everything that distin- 



414 ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE 

guishes a man from a brute. Here, tht;n, consists the highest 
adaptation of the Bible to the affections ; for that only is 
adapted to them which ennobles and purifies them. 

The religious sensibilities, the moral feelings, are most 
effectually and constantly appealed to, cherished, and 
strengthened. Where nature fails, a supernatural grace is 
given. Thus, the whole tendency and aim of the Bible is to 
reverse the fatal attraction in man's heart to that which per- 
tains alone to the bod}:. Compare by this test the religion 
of Christ with the religions that disclaim Christianity. In the 
one case we see a uniform, persevering effort to raise man 
above the unlawful sway of the senses; in the other, as marked 
an influence to brinof him into bondao;e to his lower nature. 
The one raises man to the level of the angel, the other de- 
grades him to that of the brute. Xo matter if the intellect- 
ual and {^esthetic part of the affections is addressed in other 
religions than the Bible, — no matter if the heathen have 
their code of morals that comprise some of the duties of life, 
— yet we judge of false religions by their prevailing spirit and 
tendency, not by their occasional virtues. By such a test, what 
contrast greater than that which exists between the religion 
of Christ and every system that disavows Christianity ? 

But the Bible is adapted to the affections in the intimate 
sympathy manifested toward those who suffer when the ties 
of social life and of family are sundered. What more sooth- 
ing than the words of consolation addressed to him who has 
lost a father, or mother, or brother, or sister? Where do 
poverty and want find such supports when the world is dark 
and life's pilgrimage is strewed with thorns ? A Bible for 
the prosperous and the happy, — a Bible for sunny days and 
bright skies, — a Bible for the noble, the rich, or the gifted, — 
a Bible for such classes only, — such a Bible would be no 
Bible for the great mass of mankind. It is the appropriate- 
ness of Christ's religion for dark days and storms, for adverse 
winds and the cold w^inter of life, that makes it most useful 
and that most clearly reveals its divine origin. It is when 
affliction, like night, comes down upon the heart, and suffer- 
ing and pain are the daily lot, when friends are taken away 



TO THE AFFECTIONS AND THE WILL. 415 

and the dearest ties of earth are sundered, — it is in such a 
fire that we test the purity of the gold. By such an ordeal, 
how immeasurably superior the Bible is shown to all other 
books ! To the soul of man it speaks of Christ the Saviour, 
of the resurrection, and the life of heaven, and the guardian 
angels, — of God the infinite Father, and the Holy Spirit 
the regenerator. Well might the martyrs rejoice at the 
loss of all earthly things, well might they triumph upon the 
rack and at the stake, when themes so grand, so pure, so 
noble, and so soothing absorbed the affections. For every 
deprivation of sense it repays by treasures whose value is 
but faintly shadowed forth in the words, '^ a far more ex- 
ceeding and eternal weight of glory." 

Consider not only the appropriateness of the Bible to 
the aftections, but the wise indulgence it gives to them in 
seasons of afi].iction. Stoicism, with its rough severity, en- 
genders an unnatural pride, while it sacrifices the natural 
feelings. If it teaches us not to weep, it attains its end only 
b}' the dismemberment of our nature. By repressing the 
outbursts of natural affection, it converts humanity into a 
stone. Far more wisely adapted is Christianity to our na- 
ture. The great author of Christianity wept at the grave of 
Lazarus, and in the sublime words, " Jesus wept," we have 
humanity revealed in its noblest, its most exalted form. 
Stoicism would destroy such a humanitj-; but in its ruin 
would be buried the best part of man. Directly the reverse 
of the influence of Stoicism is that of Epicureanism. The 
afiections by this are brutified, drowned in a sea of sensuality. 
They are stupefied and infinitely debased. The themes that 
the Bible presents to the affections are pure, noble, and most 
excellent. By them, while the affections are softened, they 
are also strengthened, made to entwine around pillars of im- 
mortal beauty and loveliness. But Epicureanism tramples 
the affections into the mire and shuts out from the mind 
every beam of glory. Its religion is. Eat, drink, and be merry. 
Its only life is this world, and all that lies beyond is oblivion 
and death. Thus it gives to the sensual gratification a value 
most disproportionate, and, having no heaven in the future, it 



416 ADAPTATIOX OF THE BIBLE 

would make out the short pleasures of sense the only para- 
dise for inau. To man in darkness of mind, in those hours 
when affliction throws gloom and wretchedness over the 
soul, Epicureanism has the same unvarying lesson, the same 
dull and groveling humanity, "Eat, drink, and be merry," 
and the lacerated feelings of the soul are soothed with the 
onl}^ words, "Live while you live, the Epicure would say, 
and seize the pleasures of the present day." How difierently 
are the affections treated in the Bible ! Before the riches of 
heaven, earth's riches appear infinitely little; before the 
pleasures of immortality, all the pleasures of the world 
dwindle into insignificance. 

Let us, then, consider the adaptation of the Bible to the 
will. The will is intimately associated with the affections. 
What, then, is true of the affections is equall}^ so of the will. 
What is adapted in the Bible to the one must be so to the 
other. There are two aspects in which the will finds the 
Bible adapted to it: first, as a regulating power; secondly, 
as a strengthening and energizing power. When the appe- 
tites and affections are enslaved by sin, the result is that the 
will is to the last degree irregular and inconstant in the per- 
formance of duty; it is so unstable in doing right that 
ever}' wind can blow it round the compass, and every breath 
of air make it change from a right direction. The sniallest 
temptations will upset the best resolutions. What matters 
it that the will is right this moment, if the next moment it is a 
slave to every gust of pas.sion or appetite ? 

With the affections and appetites enchained by sin, the will 
is mighty for vice and persevering in wrong. Like some 
sick man in a delirium, it possesses great strengths and 
weakness.es, now working miracles of energy, again more 
feeble than an infant. Here it is that Christianity comes in 
as a regulator to movements so inconstant and so vicious. 
For every emergency of our nature it has its separate class 
of motives ; those motives act in a twofold way : first as a re- 
straining power, again as an invigorating power. Fear is 
the mighty instrument by which it restrains the will from sin, 
liope the elixir of life by which it strengthens it to good.- 



TO THE AFFECTIONS AND THE WILL. 417 

1^0 sanctions so terrible to the transgressor as those of 
revelation, no inducements so persuasive to right action. 
To the sinner, rushing impetuously into iniquity, it speaks 
of the worm that never dies, and of the lire that is never 
quenched; it speaks of a prison whose gate mercy never 
enters, and of a punishment where justice never tires. 

This is not the place for us to discuss the question of the 
truth of such representations. Our only object now is to 
consider the Bible as adapted to the will ; and here, resting 
the whole question of future punishment upon the litness of 
things, we say, that to accomplish the end effectually of se- 
curing men from sin, the element of fear in a divine revela- 
tion is absolutely necessary. It is so in human governments ; 
why not so in the divine government? All law rests upon 
the element of fear; all penalties are but living embodiments 
of fear realized. Constituted as men are, to make the Bible 
adapted to restrain from sin, it must have the element of 
fear ; and thus we find it. Ko book has in it such motives of 
fear to deter the will from sin. 

Consider also the Bible as adapted to the will, in having 
the element of hope. Despair is the death of all action, the 
sepulcher of all happiness. Did the Bible present but one 
kind of motives, and that resting alone upon the element of 
fear, no language could describe the gloom that would rest 
upon all human affairs, no thought conceive of the depres- 
sion that would weigh down the spirits of men. Observe 
how revelation adjusts itself to that which most effectually 
can move the will. What are the inducements a skillful 
general presents to his soldiers when the battle waxes hot 
and gleaming swords and the storm-fire of death rage 
around ? Is the element of fear, of disgrace, the certainty 
of a worse end than that secured by the enemy, alone ap- 
pealed to? Far from it. A twofold combination of mo- 
tive is presented, — fear and hope. Other principles of human 
nature are addressed than those aflected by fear. Amid the 
smoke and the carnage of war, the soldier's eye is lighted 
up with the hope of victory, the glory of conquest, and the 
laurel of fame. Honor holds over his head her glittering 

2t 



418 ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE, ETC. 

crown, and the music notes of a nation's gratitude steal upon 
his ear. Just so is it in the word of God. The Christian 
soldier is nerved to his more difficult and far longer warfare 
bj a combination of motive to the will, surpassing all lan- 
guage to describe. Would the tired soldier retreat and go 
back to sin ? Fear stands at the gate of such a thought, and 
urges him to stand his ground, bj representations of disgrace 
and ruin such as make the blood run cold to think upon. 
Would he go forward ? Hope stands w^ith angel smile, and 
cheers him with music richer by far than earth's sweetest 
minstrelsy. Thus, while on the one side the will is restrained, 
on the other it is encouraged and strengthened. Deficient 
in vital power, by seeking divine help a celestial energy is 
bestowed ; then does it recover from its natural fickleness in 
doing right, and perseveres in a true direction. 

Thus, the will of man, by nature weak, inconstant, change- 
able, and uncertain, becomes, through the word of God im- 
parting to it a vital power, strong, constant, unwavering, and 
fixed, and triumphs at last, with heaven for its home, Christ 
for its portion, and immortal blessedness for its reward. We 
could not, if we would, improve upon the philosophy of the 
Bible. 



CHAPTER XIII. 

ADAPTATIO^^ OF THE BIBLE TO THE INTELLECT AXD THE 
IMAGINATION. 

Man is a complex being ; he has body, soul, and spirit. 
The body is material, the soul mental, and the spirit directly 
of divine origin. Thus, we read of the body at death return- 
ing to the dust, but of the spirit as returning to God who 
gave it. The soul and spirit of man possess not only a con- 
science, or a moral nature, but most intimately associated 
with that nature are the intellect, the imagination, the affec- 
tions, and the wilL If it is of the highest importance that 
the Bible should be adapted to the conscience, which pecu- 
liarly distinguishes man as a moral agent, it is no less 
important that there should be an adaptation in the Bible 
to the other faculties of man's nature; but most intimately 
associated with that nature are the intellect, the imagination, 
the affections, and the will. 

Let us, then, consider the adaptation of the Bible to the 
intellect of man. Before truth can reach the conscience 
and the affections and direct the will, it must first be per- 
ceived by the intellect. The understanding must be en- 
lightened, or the heart cannot be reached. Christianity is a 
system of great truths ; and these truths must be apprehended, 
or the conscience and. the will cannot act. Thus we see 
Christianity comes to us as light comes to the material 
world. The very design of the Bible is to chase away moral 
darkness. One of its chief ends is to correct the errors of a 
wrong understanding. But how is this to be done ? Evi- 
dently, by the communication to the mind of new truths, 
and the making clearer old truths, by telling us what the un- 
aided light of nature cannot reveal, and making more sensible 
to the mind those truths which it may reveal. Thus we find 

(419) 



420 ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE 

the Bible : it comes to us not as the enem}^ of natural re- 
ligion, not to oppose or supplant it, but to give an immeasur- 
able value to every truth of nature, and then to supply what 
it is most essentially deficient in by new truths of its own. 
Christianity, then, is adapted to the intellect in that it tells 
us, in respect to all moral duties, truths more clearly than 
nature, and adds others peculiarly its own. It takes every 
sound timber out of the old fabric of nature, and reconstructs a 
new temple of truth with every material available in the old. It 
gives to the intellect strength, b}' giving to it light ; it greatly 
expands the mind, by giving to it worthy objects of contem- 
plation. As food nourishes the body, so do the truths of the 
Bible nourish the mind of man, imparting vigor, energ}^, di- 
rectness of application, and comprehension of thought. But 
the Bible greatly enlarges the intellect by the variety of sub- 
jects upon wdiich it treats. Commencing with the fall of 
man, it carries the understandino: throucrh as^es of time, even 
until the mediatorial kingdom of Christ is delivered up unto 
the Father. From the infancy of humanity to its highest 
maturity, from the blissful Eden of primeval innocence to 
the last closing scenes of a redemptive process, we find com- 
prehended an epitome of man's history. In antiquity no 
book is like the Bible. Some of its treatises were written 
far beyond the age of Herodotus ; far beyond the founding 
of Greece or Eome ; far beyond the time when Homer sang 
of Ulysses and Priam and ruined Troy; far beyond any 
authentic history of the most ancient nations of Asia or 
Africa. Of the vast interval of time that comprehended the 
antediluvian world, of those centuries that elapsed after the 
flood to the exodus of the Israelites from Egypt, no unin- 
spired history can give any intelligent account. All is in- 
volved in fable or dreamy speculation. But the Bible, briefly 
and sufiiciently for our wants if not for our curiosity, has 
bridged over the mighty chasm that separates authentic 
from fabulous history ; it has supplied the lost links in that 
great chain essential for any intelligent comprehension of 
man's history and destiny. E'ot only does the intellect find 
this great want supplied, but it has an unbounded field 



TO THE INTELLECT AND IMAGINATION. 421 

for the noblest exercise in the vast, the diversilied and deep 
truths communicated. 

God might have given us a Bible consisting of only one 
book, and yet that book would be more valuable to us, as 
coming from God, than all the libraries in the world ; but he 
has given to us, in the Old and Xew Testaments, sixty-six 
books. These treatises are written in every variety of style; 
they are composed hy the most diverse class of writers ; they 
extend over a period of sixteen centuries, and yet compre- 
hend, with the highest adaptation to after-ages, all the pecu- 
liarities of language and customs of each separate period of 
their composition. Particular and yet general, they embody 
the widest latitude of style with the greatest beauty of lan- 
guage. ]^o uninspired productions have equaled the Scrip- 
tures in intellectual merit. In poetry, David and Isaiah, in 
the sublimity of their subjects, the majesty of their delinea- 
tions, far excel Homer, Yirgil, Dante, or Milton. In history 
no book can compare in value to Genesis. In ethics the in- 
structions of Christ and the apostles, in respect to every duty 
of man, are infinitely superior to all other writings. Who 
ever in philosophy has excelled Paul in depth or clearness ? 
It is not only in the higher departments of literature that the 
Bible is so superior, but also in the more delicate and refined 
descriptions of incidents and persons. ]S"o appeals to human 
sensibility are so chaste in beauty or so true to nature as those 
found in the Scriptures. Ko story, for simplicity, or pathos, 
or beauty of delineation, has yet equaled that of Joseph and 
his brethren ; or, for appropriateness and surpassing direct- 
ness of application, Nathan's parable to David. Thus, were 
the Bible looked upon only as a book for the intellect, its ab- 
sence could not be supplied by all other books. AVhat has 
so waked up the human mind as the Bible ? What has so 
absorbed the attention of all thinkers as the Scriptures ? 
From the nursery, where childhood's youngest days are spent, 
to manhood's highest development, the Bible has been the 
book of books, so simple and clear in some parts that an in- 
fant can understand, and in others so deep, so profound and 
mysterious, as to baffle the keenness of an angel's vision; 



422 ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE 

here a stream so lucid and gentle that a child may cross 
unhurt, and there an ocean of thought so interminable and 
so majestic as to elude forever all human discovery. 

But the chief merit of the Bible as a production for the in- 
tellect is that every important truth of immediate utilitj^and 
pertaining to direct duty, either to man or to God, is revealed 
with the utmost clearness. What is necessary to. save man 
as a sinner and make him better for this world and lit for 
heaven, is communicated with the most wonderful appropri- 
ateness and directness. When the Bible is read, there is some- 
thing in its style so unlike tliat of all other books, such a deep 
transparency of thought in respect to our nature, such amazing 
sagacit}' to detect all the windings of man's heart, a wisdom 
so unequaled for its suitableness to the everyday duties of 
life, that the most common conviction of the mind, even when 
the evidence of miracles and of prophecy is not considered, is. 
Such a book must proceed frDm God himself. Who else can 
produce it ? Where that college of sages existing over the 
long period of sixteen centuries, who could have composed 
the Scriptures, embodj'ing the excellences of every age and 
adapted to the wants of all, — whose truths, like virgin gold, 
are unalloyed with error and absolutely free from any imper- 
fection ? But the Bible is also most suitable for the intel- 
lect in that it closely imitates nature in its composition. 
Look to the material world ; the great facts of science do 
not all lie upon the surface of things ; running through all the 
works of nature there is a vast system, or order of arrange- 
ment; but that order is concealed from common observers. 
The mind must study long and patiently, with earnestness 
and the docility of a child, before even the outlines of that 
mysterious harmony will reveal itself. The intellect must be 
tasked before it can grasp even the rude shadow of that glo- 
rious order that reigns triumphant in nature. Here, in the 
universe of God's works, the mind of man may wander over 
riches surpassing all thought ; but yet that mind must work. 
All around nature profusely spreads her unexhausted stores ; 
but they come not to man without his own exertion. Just 
so is it in the Bible. Here are pearls and diamonds, there 



TO THE IXTELLECT AXD IMAGIXATION. 423 

rubies and sapphire stones, and gold and silver, and marble 
and iron ; but man must use his intellect to get at them ; he 
must work, as in nature, to be rich, with the riches of the 
word of God. These treasures lie concealed beneath the sur- 
face : thev call for vigorous energy to secure them ; and never 
vet did an earnest mind fail in having a reward. Here con- 
sists peculiarly the adaptation of the Bible to the intellect. Xo 
other book has ever so awakened, or can so awaken, man's 
thoughts. How noble that order, that all-comprehending 
system that reigns in nature! How divine the harmony that 
exists in the works of God ! But the Bible reveals to the 
intellect an order more glorious and a harmony more beau- 
tiful in the moral world. It reveals the moral law extending 
over angels and men, with a wider range than that of the 
mysterious principle of attraction that keeps planets and suns 
in their spheres. It reveals a system of redemption far more 
wonderful than nature's greatest truths. 

But the Bible is also adapted to the intellect in that it 
reveals the best kind of knowledge. There are two depart- 
ments of knowledge. One has reference to the separate 
parts that go to make up the whole, and the other to the ulti- 
mate design of the whole. The former, to a good degree, 
may be attained by man without a revelation direct from 
God : but the latter is altogether beyond human cogni- 
zance. Thus, a man may tell the relation the bones bear to 
the body, and how the process of digestion is carried on, or 
how the blood flows and the muscles and veins are connected 
with the body; but no man, without a divine revelation, can 
tell the great end of existence, or the ultimate design of God 
in creation, or what should be the chief object of human ex- 
istence, ^^e may know something of the relations of parts 
to the whole, but not the ultimate object of the whole itself. 
Here man's knowledge must fail him, when he attempts to 
explain the great mystery of the end of man in creation, 
and the ultimate design of the redemptive system, coeval 
with the fall of man ; a system devised from eternity by God, 
and destined to be carried on through higher and yet 
higher stages of development, until the redeemed of the 



424 ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE 

liuman family shall reach a stage of absolute perfection ; 
until in heaven the regenerated family of man shall look 
back upon the old home of their sorrow and sin as the mari- 
ner upon the ocean looks upon the dim and far-distant outlines 
of some barren island where once he had spent days of ship- 
wreck and of trouble. Such a system, in its ultimate end, 
cannot be apprehended by an uninspired mind. It demands 
a knowledge far superior to human power. Thus the intel- 
lect, in the Bible, is impressed not only with the beauty of 
the several parts that go to make up the whole, but with the 
perfection of the whole and the design of the system of Chris- 
tianity itself. The mind finds in the Bible a system old as 
the world, coeval with man, and extending through successive 
stages of higher development to the last hour of time ; a 
system that adjusts itself to every age and yet is equal to the 
wants of all ages ; a system rich with the treasures of the 
Godhead, and alike universal in its sanctions and its bless- 
ings ; a system waking up the mind with ideas of the most 
amazing grandeur, and presenting for action the most pow- 
erful motives. 

The Bible is also peculiarly adapted to the intellect in that 
for the multitude it presents the most useful and appropriate 
subjects of thought. To the favored few of wealth and 
leisure and highly cultivated taste, to that smaller number 
who are giants in reason and scholarship, no book is more 
worthy of study than the Bible ; they may know ever so 
much, but there are fields of thought in the Scriptures that 
can never be explored, subjects too great for angels to grasp. 
But the mass of mankind have not the advantages of wealth 
and learning. The pressing calls of business, and those 
avocations that demand constant labor, leave but little time 
for study or reading. Now, the Bible is just the book for 
the multitude. It is not so voluminous as to require for its 
perusal much time, or so exclusively of one style as to be 
unsuited to the difierent classes of minds. Children may de- 
lisrht themselves with its stories and histories; the more 
advanced may ever meditate with profit upon its moral truths 
and reasonings. Some may please themselves more with the 



TO THE IXTELLECT AXD UlAGIXATIOX. 425 

S3'rapatliy and patience of Job, others with the everyday wis- 
dom of Solomon. Some may love more the lofty devotion 
of David, others the sublimity of Isaiah or Ezekiel. The 
lover of narrative may be more attracted by the books of 
Moses, while the keen investigator of deep things may find 
a mine of gold In the revelations of Daniel and John. No- 
thing in solemnity, or beauty, or appropriateness, can equal 
the teachings of the apostolic epistles. And yet there is 
another adaptation of the Bible to the intellect which should 
never be omitted. It is the revelation of a remedy for sin. 
This has been alluded to in considering the adaptation of the 
Bible to the conscience; but there is a natural restlessness 
in the mind of man in connection with conscience, that needs 
somethino: to moderate tlie anxietv of tbou2:ht that arises 
under the consciousness of sin. 

In nothing is the Bible more appropriate to the intellect 
than in that, when received into the heart, it gives peace alike 
to the understanding and the conscience. Man may degrade 
himself to the level of the brutes ; he may practically think 
and act as if eating and drinking and sleeping and hoard- 
ing up money constituted the chief and only business of life; 
but there is something about the intellect that will not always 
be cajoled by such a perversion of its powers; the fires of 
an innate immortality will at times blaze fortb, and the 
thoughts restlessly ponder the great question of human des- 
tiny. AVhen, then, the intellect and the conscience both are 
awakened, the scotf of the skeptic or the sneer of the infidel 
will not always lull into slumber with the delusive idea tliat 
death is an eternal sleep, or that man and the brute difi:er 
only in respect to their bodily construction or animal wants. 
"Wlien the mind in any respect apprehends the great truth of 
the immortality of the soul, it will ponder the question of 
its probable happiness or misery in the future ; it will medi- 
tate upon the nature and end of sin, and shrink with in- 
stinctive fear from its legitimate fruit. The intellect of man 
needs not only the Bible to show how it may attain true 
peace, but it needs it to give a right end and purpose to the 
mind. 



426 ADAPTATIOX OF THE BIBLE 

The world is full of wasted intellects, genius misapplied, 
and learnino: abused. Let no man talk of the waste of 
money, when tne waste of mind is infinitely greater. While 
man has a soul, he must think; before thought can be 
stopped, the mind itself must be annihilated. The question 
is not whether a mind shall think, that is already settled, 
but hoio it shall think. Shall man immortal think only of 
his animal wants, the gratification of his sensual nature, or 
shall he think upon his destiny for two worlds, upon God 
and Christ, and beins: 2:ood, and fittino; himself for a holier 
and better state than this life? If such subjects should 
awaken attention and employ the thoughts of man, then for 
such an object the Bible is alike the greatest and the best of 
books. 

The Bible is adapted equally to the imagination. Sa^^s 
Stewart, " The faculty of the imagination is the great 
spring of human activity, and the principal source of human 
improvement. As it delights in presenting to the mind 
scenes and characters more perfect than those which we are 
acquainted with, it prevents us from ever being completely 
satisfied with our present condition or with our past attain- 
ments, and engages us continually in the pursuit of some un- 
tried enjoyment or of some ideal excellence." Again he 
says, " Tired and disgusted with this world of imperfection, 
we delight to escape to another, of the poets' creation, where 
the charms of nature wear an eternal bloom, and where 
scenes of enjoyment are opened up to us suited to the vast 
capacities of the human mind." 

The imagination may be looked upon as a source of enjoy- 
ment and principle of activity. In one respect it gives the 
highest pleasure, in another it inspires to action and exists 
as an eflB.cient agent in moulding the human character. God 
has given to man no impertinent faculty. In the material 
world we find that beauty is consulted as much as utility. 
Flowers are not suitable for food, but they are none the less 
good in their place. They are a high source of pleasure; 
their beauty pleases the eye, and their fragrance the sense 
of smell. IS'ow, the imagination is a faculty that loves to 



TO THE INTELLECT ASD DIAGIXATIOX. 427 

form ideal pictures of loveliness and jov. How airy are its 
castles in youth I How is manhood charmed with its crea- 
tions I 

The question, then, is, How shall the imagination God has 
given to man be most suitably employed ? ^here shall it 
find its purest enjoyment and its noblest sphere of activity ? 
In the Bible, is the reply. How often has an ill-regulated 
fancy engendered the worst mischief to the mind I How 
often have its feverish dreams embittered the sweets of life 
and unfitted for active duty ! How often has its improper 
exercise created a sickly sensibility, and nourished a mental 
disease as pernicious as any malady that ever has affected 
the body! But in the Bible, while the imagination has the 
widest scope, there are innumerable checks to its unlawful 
rovings. Here every element of beauty is brought into re- 
quisition, and infinitely nobler paintings than nature can 
offer. Here a richer rainbow of colors spans the sky than 
man ever saw arching the material heavens. Here the judg- 
ment day and the resurrection morn, here the world en- 
veloped in one sheeted flame, and the archangel's trump, and 
the Son of God descending from the skies, and the great 
white throne, and angels innumerable, and myriads of hu- 
man beings, are the themes for contemplation, ^"here such 
another field for the imagination? where other elements of 
such sublimity and transcendent glory? The imagination 
needs realities to dwell upon, — not dreams. There, in the 
Bible, are living certainties surpassing the highest stretch of 
thought. Here "eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither 
have entered into the heart of man, the things which God 
hath prepared for them that love him." 

But the Bible is adapted to the imagination in that it gives 
perfect models for imitation. Thus, it is peculiarly con- 
structed as a formative power to the imagination ; it regulates 
it, moulds it into a proper shape, and preserves it from false 
standards of character. Xo language can describe the mis- 
chief engendered by the imagination degrading virtues into 
vices and elevating vices into virtues ; and yet the whole 
heathen mythology is full of this inversion of moral traite. 



428 ADAPTATION OF THE BIBLE 

Witness the pagan representations of heaven, the specula- 
tions of Plato respecting a future state, the Hindoo system 
and transmigration of souls, and the paradise of Mohammed. 
How impure and unnatural the heathen gods ! How debasing 
their morality ! How pernicious their influence upon the 
mind! I^ow, the most marked effect of the Bible upon the 
imagination is, it purifies while it strengthens it; it refines 
and yet regulates it. It exerts a mighty power in preserving- 
it from the seductive charms of sense and time keeping it 
from the corruption of the world while elevating it above the 
world. Thus, the imagination, by reading the Bible, is not 
only kept from Utopian dreams, but exists in the soul as a 
deep incentive to useful action. Coming in contact with the 
mind of God, dwelling upon holy and divine themes, it 
catches the immortal fire of heaven, warm with the flame of 
the sacred altar ; it stimulates the dormant faculties of the 
soul, gives new strength to the aft'ections and new energy to 
the will. Thus the Christian martyr serenely encounters 
the torture of the stake, and sings hymns of victory upon 
the gibbet and the rack. Thus, when pagan persecution 
became hot as Nebuchadnezzar's furnace, even women and 
children w^elcomed death, and the aged and the infirm exult- 
ingly gave themselves up to the civil power. Thus, under 
the cruel sway of papal bigotry, we read of the heroic firm 
ness of the Waldenses and the Albigenses, and the noble 
army of Huguenot martyrs, and Scotland's bravest sons. Call 
this, if you please, an excited imagination; it was an imagi- 
nation with reason for its guide and God for its end. It w\as 
an imagination purified by fine gold, and as superior to the 
cold and selfish maxims of the world as heaven is higher 
than the earth. It was an imagination reposing on no 
damask cushions, regaled with no voluptuous incense, and 
dwelling in no marble palace, but disciplined in the rough 
school of adversity, with the storm-cradle of war for its 
couch, and hunger and nakedness for its daily lot. 

Call not that of human origin that can so elevate man 
above this earth ; say not that a book that can so reach every 
faculty of man can be the fruit of uninspired wisdom. Go, 



TO THE INTELLECT AND IMAGINATION. 429 

if not yet convinced, to the death-bed of the Christian, and 
witness amid the dissolutions of nature the last utterances of 
the good. Observe the smile that lights up the countenance 
ere yet the spirit has left the body; meditate upon the hope, 
the peace, the faith, and the joy that leave their last impress 
upon that countenance now fixed in the slumber of the grave ; 
and then think not strange the exclamation of a celebrated 
infidel, when questioned by his child in whose system he 
should believe, in his or that of her Christian mother: "Believe, 
my child, in the religion of your mother T'' 



CHAPTER XIY. 

MORAL POWER OF CHRISTIANITY. 

In the two kinds of evidence that exert an influence upon 
the heart, we see that the evidence which convinces the rea- 
son differs only from that which satisfies the feelings by the 
mode in which it is apprehended. Reason arrives at proof by 
a slow process, the affections by a quick process ; the former 
is protracted in time, the latter immediate. The sphere of 
the one is the intellect, that weighs and compares arguments; 
the other the moral sensibilities, that instinctively decide 
upon the question of right and wrong, of fitness or unfitness. 
The sensibilities are intimately affected by whatever pertains 
to moral beauty and harmony, just as we see in a harp that 
the kind of music given is made to depend upon the skill 
and delicacy of the touch of the hand. Thus with the moral 
sensibilities: some foreign power must reach those sensibili- 
ties and come in contact with them, before there comes forth 
a response. 

The first evidence of the moral power of Christianity upon 
the human soul is shown in the exclusive supremacy it gives 
to God, and the infinite authority of his will to control our 
conduct. When, then, the Bible is welcomed into the heart 
of man, the intellect pronounces that such an authority has 
to support it, in the Bible, suflacient evidence for belief; and 
the sensibilities pronounce a decision in favor of the right- 
ness and fitness of such an authority. Consequently, Christi- 
anity reveals itself as a power, a divine power, laying alike its 
sanctions upon the reason and the afiections, compelling the 
one to assent to the divine truth of the Bible, and the other 
to admit the divine excellence of the Bible. Thus is there 
made known a power bringing into captivity the thoughts 
(430) 



MORAL POWER OF CHRISTIANITY. 431 

and feelings to the obedience of Christ, and leading the rea- 
son and the conscience to the condition of submission to the 
authority of God. It is in this respect that religion owes its 
very meaning. Its derivation, from the two words re and ligo^ 
is to bind anew, or bind over again. Thus Christianity as a 
religion evinces its power in binding anew the mind and 
heart to the service of God, and urging to a cordial obedience 
the reason and the conscience, throwing over both the com- 
manding sanctions of a superior power, and leading to its re- 
ception from the conviction of the transcendent excellence of 
the divine will. It is this peculiarity that distinguishes the 
Bible from uninspired productions. AVhen we read the 
words of a man, we find that, resting upon no higher au- 
thority than human reason, we are at liberty to treat those 
words according to that common standard by which we 
measure one man by another or compare ourselves with 
others of mankind. But when we read the words of God 
the case is altoo:ether diflerent: we come then to a standard 
of belief and practice as far above man as God himself is 
above the creature. Here we see a power revealed by which 
anew the reason and the conscience are bound, a power that 
rests itself upon omnipotence and a wisdom as boundless 
as the universe. 

Such is the manner in which Christianity comes to us. It 
comes making known to the reason and the sensibilities a 
standard of belief and practice that embodies in it not only 
a divine authority, but a revelation of that which is as supe- 
rior to the unassisted light of nature as heaven is higher 
than the earth. Consequently, we see in the Bible a sacred- 
uess that is absent in any production of man. There are 
gleams and flashes in it of a divine light. We discover in 
its representations of human nature a handwriting so pecu- 
liar as to baffle alike the ingenuity of man to imitate or invent, 
— such a deep transparency of wisdom, such inimitable con- 
ciseness and yet comprehensiveness of thought, that the mind 
of man seems to come, as it were, into the presence-chamber 
of the Deity and see there reflected from its walls the bright- 
ness of his glory. The moral power of Christianity is seen, 



432 MORAL POWER OF CHRISTIANITY. 

like a mighty magnet, drawing to itself the endless diversi- 
ties of human thought and feeling, infusing into the soul of 
man a new life, urging to duty by new ties, and controlling 
with heavenly sanctions every conflicting element of the na- 
ture of man. Another evidence of the moral power of Chris- 
tianity is manifested in the harmony it preserves between 
reason and faith. Xo word has been so misused as the word 
faith in relation to the Bible and to Christ. Because faith 
has its own peculiar sphere, it has often been imagined that 
it is opposed to the reason, or in its nature hostile to it; 
but such an objection would be equally valid against the 
afi:ections. There is nothing in faith opposed to right 
reason; it is only when reason is perverted, when it is abused 
and transcends its sphere, that any issue exists between the 
two. True faith is the result of the reason and the sensibili- 
ties submitting to the reality of good evidence in the Bible 
to prove it from God. It is simply the affectionate assent 
of the mind to revealed truths so entire as to lead to right 
practice. There can be no true faith without the exercise of 
the reason, any more than without the exercise of the sensi- 
bilities ; both are necessary for the existence even of faith. 

Such being the fact, the power of Christianity is peculiarly 
displayed in the harmony it institutes with faith and all the 
faculties of the soul. The error of skepticism is that it over- 
looks the true sphere of reason, while that of superstition is 
that it binds it in its sphere. The one makes reason a home- 
less fugitive without a guide; the other, a timorous slave 
trembling under the lash of a tyrant. Thus it will be seen 
that while the one drives reason over a sea of doubts, the 
other imprisons it upon a desolate island. But Christianity 
avoids both extremes, and preserves a happy medium be- 
tween the two. Does not reason find in revelation a bound- 
less field for activity ? Is it not there treated as a friend ? 
Is anything demanded of it that is not most suitable ? Is it 
not right that reason should not go out of its sphere and re- 
ject facts because of the difficulties connected with those 
facts ? When belief upon the highest reason is demanded, 
should reason object? 



MOBAL POWEH OF CREISTIAXITT. 433 

"What, then, is the rehition that faith sustains to reason and 
the sensihilities in the Bible? There are two kinds of evi- 
dence to these two parts of our nature to show it from God. 
Upon the great question of what is right, what in its nature 
is fit and suitable, the sensibilities give an immediate re- 
sponse in favor of the Bible. Thev declare that it is right 
that God should command and man obey, that it is suitable 
to practice the precepts of the Old and iN'ew Testaments, and 
good to do that which they demand of us toward God and 
man. There is a moral beauty in the Bible that the sensi- 
bilities instinctively perceive; there is a correspondence to 
the laws of our being that they at once recognize. They feel 
that the divine law should tolerate no sin, and that its sanc- 
tions are founded in justice; however indisposed by sin, 
they must yet confess the purity and excellence of Christ. 
There is such a divine goodness about the Bible, such a 
sympathy with man as a fallen being, such an interest dis- 
played in his welfare, such a solicitude to heal his spiritual 
maladies, that the sensibilities must feel that the Bible is the 
best of books. The reason also, when it uses appropriately 
the varied instruments which God has placed in its hands to 
detect falsehood from truth, finds in the Bible no contradic- 
tion in recorded focts, and no error in principles. All the 
evidences from miracles and prophecy are found to be valid. 
Eeason is obliged to assent not only to the reality of the 
proof, but to the greatness of the proof. 

There is in the Bible a combined power of evidence, ac- 
cumulatinsr with every as^e, and ojrowino^ bricrhter and 
brighter with the flight of time. TVhat, then, is the relation 
that faith in the Bible sustains both to reason and the sensi- 
bilities? Reason and the sensibilities havins^ evidence enouo'h 
to prove the Bible from God, it only remains that the heart 
should believe it such, and practice what it believes. The 
moral power of Christianity is seen in that it ennobles both 
the reason and the sensibilities and harmonizes both. The 
sensibilities it makes pure, the reason it exalts. It recon- 
ciles both. Conscience finding in revelation a right standard, 
and reason a sufiicient evidence, by a true belief they both 

28 



434 2I0BAL POWEB OF CHRISTIANITY. 

move on in nnison. No higher proof can there be to the 
soul of the divine power of the Bible, than the peace it gives 
to the conscience, and the assurance it imparts to the reason. 
Man, as a fallen being, as a sinner before God, carries about 
in his heart discordant elements, a state of perpetual dis- 
quietude, and a ceaseless conflict in the sensibilities and the 
reason. Conscience feels the existence of sin, and the reason 
proves it. 

Another illustration of the power of Christianity is dis- 
played in the treatment of those sensibilities of our nature 
that show human accountability. There are in our nature 
religious wants that must be satisfied, a deep apprehension 
of the justice of that Being before Tvhose tribunal the con- 
duct must pass for scrutiny and the deeds of a whole life be 
examined. 

Human nature must be annihilated before those sensibili- 
ties that speak of obligation to the Deity, and that mysterious 
relation that man sustains to God, can be destroyed. Amid 
the grossest errors of superstition, or the blind groping of 
skepticism, man yet carries about in his own heart that 
which tells of duty to a superior Being and unfolds a dread 
accountability to the infinite Creator of body and spirit. 
In nothing is the power of Christianity' more clearly seen 
than in the cultivation of this religious sense in man, and 
the careful fostering of those sensibilities that distinguish 
him from the brutes. When Christianity speaks to our 
moral nature, it touches upon that which at once reveals its 
divine source. Amid the endless diversities of human char- 
acter, it speaks of the greatness of man's spiritual wants 
and the efficacy of the remedy as revealed in Christ. Chris- 
tianity presents the only true sphere for the moral nature of 
man. Away from God, reason becomes dark, and the sensi- 
bilities corrupt. As the moral nature departs at a greater 
distance from him, there reigns within a wider anarchy, or a 
more debasing bondage to error. Christianity tends directly 
to reverse this downward progress: it counteracts the repul- 
sive power of sin that alike darkens the intellect and corrupts 
the heart. With mighty attraction it brings it back to the 



MORAL POWER OF CHRISTIANITY. 435 

genial warmth of the sun, it melts that ice which encircles the 
heart, it penetrates with its warm beams the frozen regions 
of spiritual death, and creates the verdure of summer where 
once ruled the desolation of winter. 

But the peculiar power of Christianity is seen in the inti- 
mate alliance with it of the Spirit of God. It was the co- 
operation of the Eternal Spirit that first indited the words of 
the Bible, and gives such energy to the truth of God. He is 
a discerner of the thoughts ; with infinite sagacity he brings 
to the conscience and the reason the truths of the Bible, and 
compels us to look to the faithful exhibition of our own 
hearts. Our motives are weighed in the balances ; our most 
secret thoughts are scanned ; the deepest recesses of our 
souls are laid open to our inspection. To make us know 
ourselves is as much the aim of Christianity as to lead us to 
the knowledge of God. Thus, the power of Christianity is 
shown by leading the heart to the knowledge of itself and 
the knowledge of God, leading to the renunciation of sin, 
imparting to the soul new hopes, and throwing over every 
relation of life new sanctions. Man, a sinner, through a 
divine influence finds strength to resist temptation, courage 
to contend with difficulties, and hope to inspire to efibrt. 
Thus there begins in the soul a reverse movement from sin. 
That fatal attraction of a corrupt nature that once kept from 
the service of God is exchanged for that other attraction that 
draws the heart to God, leading nearer and yet nearer to the 
fountain-source of heaven's love, the peace of conscience, 
and the enjoyments of that which surpasses all thought to 
describe. The Holy Spirit always acts in unison with the 
Sacred Scriptures ; he teaches no revelation not compre- 
hended in the Bible ; being the embodiment of the mind of 
God, he takes of the inspired word and impresses that word 
upon the heart of man, writing it as it were upon the table 
of the soul with the point of a diamond, and inscribing in 
legible characters those immutable truths contained in the 
Holy Scriptures. 

Thus the power of Christianity is seen by bringing the 
sensibilities and the reason into a condition of obedience to 



436 MORAL POWER OF CHRISTIANITY. 

God. As a messenger from heaven, the Bible comes to us 
revealing Christ our Saviour, and opening up to the lost 
family of man the way to eternal life. It urges us to listen 
to the voice of our best friend and hear the entreaties. of that 
celestial wisdom that would secure for us the immortality of 
the sons of God, and warns us not to reject our noblest 
security, and that salvation purchased for us by the blood 
of Christ. 

The moral power of Christianity is also seen in its direct 
effects upon society, and its remote influences. Its power 
has been contemplated upon the individual heart. Observe, 
now, how society is made to feel its presence. The religion 
of Christ is peculiarly the light of the world. It has in it 
the truth that is able to make wise unto salvation. Its power 
is seen in every community where it exists, in raising the 
standard of moral excellence and suppressing the more vi- 
cious inroads of selfishness. Thus, when those lands where 
the Bible is read and Christ's religion prevails are contrasted 
with the regions that are destitute of Christianity, we see at 
once a marked superiority in all that advances the welfare of 
man. What is it but the moral power of Christianity that has 
relieved the horrors of war, that has suppressed the evils of 
slavery, or checked the ravages of intemperance ? What is 
it but Christianity that has discountenanced every form of 
licentiousness, and thrown in every age its shield of protec- 
tion over the most sacred relations of the family and the 
rights of woman ? What is it but Christianity that has curbed 
the violence of war, or given moderation to civil rulers, or 
guided with safety human governments, or repressed the 
arrogance of party spirit? Christianity has changed, where- 
ever it has prevailed, the whole condition of society. By 
making supreme the authority of God, it has most effectually 
put down the tyranny of man, and given a sure foundation 
to all the virtues. By revealing a Saviour from sin, it has 
satisfied the demands of conscience, and opened up to the 
soul an immortality and blessedness beyond the grave. Thus 
has this power eflPected the reconciliation of man to God, 
broken down that wall of adamant that separates the sinner 



MOEAL POWEB OF CHRISTIANITY. 437 

from the Deity, and thrown upon the path of the sincere 
believer the full blaze of heaven's glory. How great, then, 
the responsibility the very existence of Christianity brings 
with it! It places man upon a new trial for his happiness, 
and binds him to the performance of duties that no ingenuity 
can evade, no hatred escape. Those duties rest upon us 
wherever we may go ; and, ever present, man has no other 
alternative than to obey and be saved, or disobey and be lost 

With the highest meaning the words come to us, as once 
they came to the woman of Samaria : 

" Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection and the life ; 
he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he 
live." 



CHAPTER XY. 

THE HARMONY OF SCIENCE AND REVELATION. 

We can conceive of no greater injury- to the cause of 
Christianity than the over-zealous effort to represent the 
investigations of science as opposed to revelation. Science 
is a record of facts ; and what is revelation but a record 
of facts ? The student of science may be in error in what 
he believes to be the record of facts; and what is to prevent 
the student of revelation from being in error also in respect 
to some of its facts? Why is the human mind more infallible 
in the one than in the other? Why does the interpreter of 
Scripture assume that his system of interpretation in all 
things is necessarily right, and that of those who in honesty 
differ from him is wrong? It is of the very essence of dog- 
matism to pronounce without examination upon the inter- 
pretation of another, while it eulogizes its own as the only 
correct one. Especially is this so when the subjects proposed 
for discussion are recondite and not of vital consequence ; 
when diversity of view may be held without any departure 
from essential truth; when minute coincidences and subtle 
distinctions only are called in question ; when no one promi- 
nent doctrine of the Bible is doubted or denied; when there 
is only a difference of sentiment upon views of altogether 
inferior importance, and which should only be treated with 
moderation or dissented from with good temper. But, most 
unnecessarily, it happens that when the lover of science pro- 
pounds, as did Galileo or Copernicus, views somewhat differ- 
ent from the common interpretation, there is often, with over- 
heated theological partisans, an alarm raised, as if the whole 
Bible was in its credibility endangered, and in its very foun- 
dations undermined. But the difficulty is, they were wrong, 
and not their Scriptures. It is their interpretation that is er- 
(438) 



HARMONY OF SCIENCE AND REVELATION. 439 

roneous, and not the Bible. Why should every new discovery 
in the sciences be hailed as the harbinger of evil, and a new 
truth made known be regarded as an obtrusive novelty? The 
Bible is no suspicious character, deprecating the steps of ever}^ 
adventurer in knowledge ; it thunders no anathema against 
the student of science. Free as the air itself, generous as 
the magnificent variety of nature, noble as its great Author, 
it oflPers itself for the deepest, the widest, the most searching 
scrutiny ; it fears no foe, and it compromises with no eneni}' ; 
it has no retraction to make, and no chain to fetter the 
loftiest stretch of human thought. But it does, with reason, 
demand that thought should be lawful and investigation 
true, — that the lover of science should be humble before the 
infinite Author of science, and treat with deference the un- 
equivocal assertions of revelation. It does demand that 
unripe speculation should not be indorsed as truth, nor infant 
theories be worshiped as the maturity of knowledge. Let 
us, first, ask ourselves, What is the attitude of the Bible 
toward science ? what ground does it take ? Everything de- 
pends upon a correct answer to this question. The business 
of revelation has especial reference to all moral duty, to 
our relations, as responsible beings, to God and man. All 
truth made known has immediate bearing upon this point. 
Here is the dividing line between essential and unessential 
truth. Whatever has a moral aspect — whatever relates to 
God or to man — is essential. Beyond this point truth made 
known is incidental ; and views, correct or incorrect, upon 
such truths, never should be regarded as of vital importance, 
^ow^, all the cardinal doctrines of the Bible are intimately 
connected with duties toward God and man, and therefore 
come under that which it is essential to receive. A man if he 
does not breathe the air will die ; but it does not follow that 
death will result from his wearing a red coat rather than a black 
one. To demand a rigid and undeviating uniformity upon the 
minutiae of revelation, an exact agreement upon all unessential 
truth, is asking too much of human nature. So long as God 
has made minds to difter, and constitutional varieties of 
thought as much as of body, it follows that there must be dif- 



440 THE HABMONY OF 

fereiices of opinion upon the minutiae of the Bible. The 
Bible treats all scientiiic truth as pertaining to the minuti^ 
of revelation ; it treats it as unessential for uniformity of 
belief. All moral duty and right belief upon Christ are 
of the utmost importance; but not so with the discoveries 
of science; not so with the beauties of art or the embellish- 
ments of poetry ; not so with the graces of style or the 
closeness of logic. It is the Christian infinitely more in his 
heart than in his speculative notions that is looked at; his 
uprightness of conduct, more than his expansion of mind. 
Consequently, with revelation the greatest heresy is wicked- 
ness, and the worst infidelity a bad life. And yet, while re- 
garding mainly the conduct, the right reception of the Bible 
leads directly to uniformity of belief upon all essential truth. 
The Bible uses popular language upon all subjects. The 
precision of the metaphysicians can be obtained only by 
adopting their abstruseness of language. Their exactness is 
purchased at the expense of clearness. But would it be 
proper for the Bible, made for all ages and all men, to make 
use of a dialect unintelligible to ninety-nine hundredths of the 
human family? Would it be proper for God to exchange 
adaptation for exclusiveness, compactness for indefinite ex- 
pansion, and that golden coin current among all nations for 
bills of credit valueless beyond a limited circle? Would it 
be proper to throw away in popular language a medium of 
thought as universal as the water we drink, for metaphysical 
preciseness that, like the spiced wines of the rich, are only 
available for the few ? We come, then, to the conclusion that 
the language of the Bible is the best possible. Does that 
language conflict with any of the plain facts of science? 

There is yet to be shown the first discrepancy with the 
truths of science. Remember, the Bible presents no formal 
treatise upon astronomy, geology, or chemistry. It would 
not, if it did, adapt itself to the moral wants of the world in 
all ages ; it would have been in the highest degree premature 
to enter into the intricacies of recent discoveries, or teach 
those scientific truths made known within the last three cen- 
turies. Moral truth comes before intellectual novelty; the 



SCIEXCE AXD REVELATION. 441 

former relates to salvation, the latter to retinement of mind, 
and is as inferior in value as the soul is of more consequence 
than the body. The only thing necessary to show is that 
there is no collision between the two, that one is in harmony 
with the other, that no theory in the Bible is propounded 
inconsistent with any legitimate truth of science. Right 
science does not demand of revelation the giving up of popu- 
lar language, nor does revelation demand of science the 
abandonment of a single truth. Both are in unison. Igno- 
rance ma}' imagine a disagreement, and make discrepancies 
out of its doubts, but knowledge, like the telescope, resolves 
mists into nebulse, and nebulee into stars. Let the arrogant 
disbeliever clear his glasses, or make better ones, and he will 
soon find all mistakes summed up in his own presumption 
and want of knowledge. 

" Christianity," says President L. W. Green, " courts in- 
vestigation, — she invites scrutiny, — she challenges discussion, 
— she throws down her s^auntlet of defiance to everv antas^o- 
nist, — and in every age a thousand foes have leaped forward 
to mingle in the assault. They come from every quarter, 
and of every character, — each hoary superstition, each beard- 
less science. They wield every weapon of refined or barbar- 
ous warfare, drawn from the domain of history or liction, of 
imagination or of fact. They dig into the bowels of the 
earth, and hew the granite mountain, — they explore the un- 
fathomed depths of space, search the sepulchers of buried 
nations, decipher hieroglyphical inscriptions in temples, pyr- 
amids, and tombs, study the fabulous genealogies and fabu- 
lous astronomies of races whose sublime progenitors, accord- 
ing to their own account, must have been cotemporaries of 
the saurian tribes of an earlier world. There is not a false 
religion upon earth that could bear the test of such a scru- 
tiny for a single year, — that would not vanish instantaneously 
before the light of a single science. The telescope and micro- 
scojje alone would suffice to overthrow all the ancient reli- 
gions of Farther Asia. That the Sacred Scriptures should 
have come forth not only unharmed, but victorious, from all 
the conflicts of eighteen centuries, — that not one of their fifty 



442 THE HARMONY OF 

writers has ever uttered or suggested an opinion contrary 
to any of those facts which the lapse of twenty-three hundred 
years has revealed, — that each new discovery in science, 
each fact drawn forth from pyramid or pillar, from sepulcher 
or coin, from mutilated monument or half-defaced inscrip- 
tion, should only serve to throw new light upon their mean- 
ing and add new evidence to their credibility, — is perhaps the 
completest specimen which the whole range of human learn- 
ing has yet afforded of the truth of a theory established by 
millions of independent harmonies, mounting up, in their 
combined and multiple result, to billions of probabilities in 
its favor, with absolutely nothing to the contrary. The his- 
tory of these ohjections against Christianity would be, in- 
deed, her proudest vindication. Geology herself, in all her 
cycles, does not present more curious specimens of infidel, 
objections, long buried and forgotten beneath the huge 
masses of argument and learning with which consecrated 
genius has overwhelmed and preserved them,^-at once their 
monument and sepulcher. First it was objected against the 
genuineness of the sacred records, 'that we have not the 
very works of the evangelists and apostles themselves.' Sa- 
cred learning has distinctly proven that these identical writ- 
ings existed, and were read in public assemblies throughout 
the civilized world, during the first century, — were quoted 
by numerous writers, their immediate successors, during the 
three succeeding centuries, in such profusion that the whole 
!N"ew Testament, in every essential fact and doctrine, might be 
reconstructed from the quotations by these various authors; 
thus presenting a larger amount of testimony to this single 
book, in the course of three centuries, than could be gathered 
from all the writers of all centuries^ in behalf of the Greek and 
Roman classics, all combined. It was then objected against 
their ' uncorrupted preservation,'' ' that they had been trans- 
mitted, through many centuries, by means of various manu- 
scripts written by different hands; and that Mill, and other 
critics, had discovered a corresponding number of various 
readings, casting thus a serious doubt over the integrity and 
authority of the received texts.' The most profound investi- 



SCIENCE AXD REVELATION. 443 

gations of modern times have proven that all these doubtful 
readings are really of slight importance ; and even were each 
admitted, or the passages in which each occur all stricken 
from the Bible, not one essential doctrine of our faith would 
be in the slightest degree aifected ; and the great fabric of 
sacred truth would remain as complete in its proportions, its 
symmetry and strength, as some vast cathedral, from whose 
strong foundations or lofty dome the hand of folly or the 
lapse of time had crumbled the minutest portion of the 
cement which served to unite, but did not constitute, the 
massive marble of which the building was composed. Driven 
by successive defeats from the sure terra jirraa of historical 
testimony, infidelity took refuge amidst the hierogl^'phics of 
Egypt and the astronomy of the Hindoos. Bailly proved to' 
his own satisfaction, from the record of eclipses among the 
Hindoos, that the existence of man upon earth was many 
thousand years earlier than the Mosaic history would allow ; 
and this whimsical- vagary of a visionary man, though hooted 
out of France by the wit of Voltaire and the science of 
D'Alembert, was long an established article of faith among 
the enlightened infidels of England, Scotland, and America. 
Mathematical demonstration and historical testiraon}- have 
since combined to show that these eclipses were calculated 
clumsily, backwards, for ages that were past, and cannot be 
dated so early as the commencement of the Christian era. 

"Some French savans attached toXapoleon's army during 
the expedition into Egypt discovered mysterious zodiacs. 
Though unable to decipher the hieroglyphics with certainty, 
one thing was indisputable, — that the zodiacs were con- 
structed at the lowest seventeen thousand, probably eighteen 
thousand, years ago ; and the writer well remembers how his 
boyish faith was shaken by the bold assertions and con- 
temptuous sneers of the Edinburgh Review against all who 
hesitated to receive their oracular utterance, founded, as 
they said, upon mathematical demonstration. Champollion 
and his co-laborers have read the inscription, and find that 
it belongs to the age of Tiberius Coesar. Comparative anat- 
omy, meantime, had become, through the genius of Cuvier, 



444 THE HARMONY OF 

an important field of investigation, and presented many 
striking examples of the analogical resemblance between the 
structure of man and that of other animated beings. Pro- 
fessor Oken, descending one day the Hartz Mountains, be- 
held the beautiful blanched skull of a hind. ' I picked it up, 
regarded it intently,' says he: ' the thing was done.' Since 
that time the skull has been regarded as a vertebral column. 
Rapidly over all Europe and throughout all scientific circles 
spread the bold hypothesis that the skull is but a develop- 
ment of the spine, part of that other more comprehensive 
theory of development which represents man — intellectual, 
moral, immortal man — as the development of the brute, — 
itself the development of some monad, or mollusk, which 
•has been smitten into life by the action of electricity upon a 
gelatinous monad. This vertebral portion of a brutal theory, 
sprang from the skull of a beast, long since emptied of its 
brains, had passed like a flood of lightning through his 
disorganized brain., and he very naturally concluded that all 
human intfMigence is the. result of an electric spark passed 
through an unorganized gelatinous monad. It has been well 
remarked by an able writer that the strongest argument in 
favor of this theory is, that any human being should ever 
have been found willing to adopt, much more to assert with 
eagerness, this high relationship to the orang-outang and 
ape. Congeniality of sympathy may have community of 
origin. ^A fellow-feeling makes us wondrous kind.' Hooted 
from the earth, the development hj^pothesis took refuge 
amidst the distant nebulae of the farther heavens. Driven 
thence by Lord Eosse's telescope, it returned again to the 
earth ; and the last sad record of its tragic fate assures us 
that, hemmed and jammed in at last between granite pyra- 
mids and huge masses of old red sandstone, it was shivered 
to atoms by a blow from the stone hammer of a Caledonian 
quarrier, and of all its prodigious ^creations' no ^vestiges' 
now remain." 

When we observe the countless worlds opened up to our 
view by the telescope, we perceive that the vast creation of 
God is as diversified in its nature as it is hour '^ 



SCIENCE AND REVELATION. 445 

tent ; we enjoy new and grand fields of thought, that find no 
limit in subjects and no sameness in variety. Happy is it for 
the cause of truth that the Bible, while it touches cautiously 
upon themes of purely scientific interest, never infringes 
upon any well-attested fact of science. It does indeed clothe 
its language in a popular garb; but so carefully worded is 
every sentence that no assertion is made to conflict with the 
clearly established truths of nature. But more than this : 
whatever revelation says, when subjected to a careful in- 
vestigation, confirms science rather than otherwise. Its tes- 
timony is positive, rather than negative; it not only says 
nothing against the facts of science, but much to strengthen 
them. Thus, while every other book presenting claims of a 
religious character, and in opposition in its teachings to the 
Bible, stumbles upon the very threshold of the new discov- 
eries of science, the Bible, true in every age, is yet revealed 
with brighter luster in the more brilliant unfolding of the 
truths of nature in the present age. 

It has been thought by many that if the researches of 
astronomy or chemistry are not in conflict with revelation, 
if nothing of validity can be found to disprove the Mosaic 
account of the unity of the origin of man, the oneness of 
his descent from a single stock, yet at least the discoveries 
of geology, or its teachings, are opposed to the Mosaic ac- 
count of the six days' creation. But let it be remembered, 
the Bible does not hold itself as the servant of the particular 
features of geology. It does not undertake to father all the 
conflicting views of this new science; it does not iiidorse all 
that may be called the instructions of this science; and yet 
it will be seen that it does not conflict with its essential feat- 
ures, but rather is in harmony with the whole scope of geol- 
ogy, when viewed with a spirit of candor and impartiality. 
What, then, are some of the essential elements of geology ? 

First. It teaches that one epoch of ruin and creation is 
succeeded by another of a higher grade of vegetable or of 
animal being. 

Second. It teaches great catastrophes of ruin as followed 
by creations of vegetable and animal life. 



446 THE HABMONY OF 

Third. It teaches that these epochs extended over vast 
periods of time and were of indefinite extent. 

Fourth. It teaches every epoch as introduced by miracle 
rather than a gradual development of natural law. 

The question, then, is. Are these teachings in realitij opposed 
to revelation? To investigate this subject, in justice to the 
Bible, is our object. We do not now discuss the question 
whether geology is true or whether the Bible is true. The 
only thing to be done is to ascertain what is the true inter- 
pretation of the first chapter of Genesis. How are w^e to 
understand it? The Mosaic narrative commences with the 
declaration that "In the beginning God created the heaven 
and the earth." These few words briefly state the great fact 
of the original creation of the material elements at a time dis- 
tinctly preceding the operations of the first day. This opinion 
is in accordance not only with the most natural interpreta- 
tion, but it harmonizes with the sentiments of the whole sci- 
entific world, and has to support it the authority of the most 
learned of the Christian church. It is a sublime exhibition 
of the great truth of the absolute creation of God, and his 
perfect power in bringing into existence every material 
element. Thus, the first verse explicitly asserts the creation 
of the universe, including the sidereal systems; ''and the 
earth," — especially alluding to our own planet as the subse- 
quent scene of the operations of the six days about to be 
described. Thus, in this verse no information is given of 
events unconnected with the history of man. Millions of 
years may therefore have intervened before the creation of 
man, in which the sidereal systems and the earth may have 
passed through vast periods of time, l^o limit is placed to 
the ages which may have elapsed between the beginning in 
whicb God created the heaven and the earth, and the evening, 
or the commencement of the first day of the Mosaic narra- 
tive. To assert the contrary is acting without any good 
reason. Why may not this be so? Does Moses assert the 
contrary? So far from this, Moses expressly declares, in 
the following verse, that " the earth was without form, and 
void," evidently speaking of a chaotic state of the earth; 



SCIENCE AND REVELATION 447 

but this condition of the earth must have been subsequent to 
the state of tilings spoken of in the first verse, where the 
original creation of the earth, or its elements, is described. 
There is no authority for making the first verse and the first 
half of the second verse cotemporarj with the first day's 
work. Says E B. Pusey, Begins Professor of Hebrew in 
Oxford: ''The point, however, upon which the interpreta- 
tion of the first chapter of Genesis appears to me really to 
turn, is whether the first two verses are merely a summary 
statement of what is related in detail in the rest of the chap- 
ter, and a sort of introduction to it, or whether they contain 
an account of an act of creation ; and this last seems to me 
to be their true interpretation : first, because there is no other 
account of the creation of the earth ; secondly, the second 
verse describes the condition of the earth when so created, 
and thus prepares for the account of the work of the six 
days. But, if they speak of any creation, it appears to me 
that this creation ' in the beginning' was previous to the six 
days, because, as you will observe, the creation of each day 
is preceded by the declaration that God said, or willed, that 
such things shall be (' and God said') ; and therefore the very 
form of the narrative seems to imply that the creation of the 
first day began when these words are first used, i.e. with the 
creation of light, in verse third. The time, then, of the crea- 
tion in verse first appears not to be defined; we are told only 
what alone we are concerned with, — that all things were 
made by God. IN'or is this any new opinion. Many of the 
fathers supposed the first two verses of Genesis to contain an 
account of a distinct and prior act of creation ; some, as 
Angustine, Theodoret, and others, that of the creation of 
matter ; others, that of the elements ; others, again (and they 
are the most numerous), imagine that not these visible heav- 
ens, but what they think to be called elsewhere 'the highest 
heavens,' ' the heaven of heavens,' are here spoken of. Our 
visible heavens being related to have been created on the 
second day, Petovius himself regards the light as the only 
act of creation of the first day (' de opere primae diei, i.e. 
luce'); considering the first two verses as a summary of the 



448 THE HARMONY OF 

account of creation which was about to follow, and a general 
declaration that all things were made by God." 

Professor Pusey also remarks that the words "Let there be 
light" "by no means necessarily imply, any more than the 
English words by which they are translated, that light had 
never existed before. They may speak only of the substitu- 
tion of liglit for darkness upon the surface of this our planet. 
Whether light had existed before in other parts of God's 
creation, or had existed upon this earth before the darkness 
described in verse second, is foreign to the purpose of the 
narrative." 

Dr. Buckland, in his Bridgewater Treatise, remarks, con- 
cerning the earth mentioned in the lirst verse of Genesis: 
" AYe have further mention of this ancient earth and ancient 
sea in the ninth verse, in which the waters are commanded 
to be gathered together into one place, and the dry land to 
appear; this dry land being the same earth whose material 
creation had been announced in the first verse, and whose 
temporary submersion and temporary darkness are described 
in the second verse. The appearance of the land and the 
gathering together of the w^aters are the only facts affirmed re- 
specting them in the ninth verse ; but neither land nor water 
is said to have been created on the third daj-. A similar in- 
terpretation may be given of the fourteenth and four suc- 
ceeding verses. What is herein stated of the celestial 
luminaries seems to be spoken solely with reference to our 
planet, and more especially to the human race then about to 
be placed upon it. We are not told that the substance of the 
sun and moon w^ere first called into existence upon the fourth 
day; the text may equally imply that these bodies were then 
prepared, and appointed to certain high ofiices of high im- 
portance to mankind: to give 'light upon the earth, and 
to rule over the day and over the night:' to be 'for signs, 
and for seasons, and for days, and years.' The fact of their 
creation had been stated before, in the first verse. The stars 
also are mentioned in these words only (Gen. i. 16), almost 
parenthetically, as if for the sole purpose of announcing that 
they also were made by the same power as those luminaries 



SCIENCE AND REVELATION. 449 

whicli are more important to lis. This very slight notice of 
the countless hosts of the celestial bodies, all of which are 
probably suns, the centers of other planetary systems, while 
our little satellite, the moon, is mentioned as next in impor- 
tance to the sun, shows clearly that astronomical phenomena 
are here spoken of only according to their relative impor- 
tance to our earth and to mankind, and without any regard 
to their real importance in the boundless universe. It seems 
impossible to include the fixed stars among those bodies 
which are said (Gen. i. 17) to have been set in the firmament 
of the heavens to give light upon the earth ; since, without 
the aid of telescopes, by far the greater number of them are 
invisible. The same principle seems to pervade the descrip- 
tion of the creation which concerns our planet. The creation 
of its component matter having been announced in the first 
verse, the phenomena of geology, like those of astronomy, 
are passed over in silence, and the narrative proceeds at once 
to details of the actual creation which have more immediate 
reference to man. The interpretation here proposed seems, 
moreover, to solve the difficulty which would otherwise 
attend the statement of the appearance of light upon the 
first day, while the sun and moon and stars are not made 
to appear until the fourth. If we suppose all the heavenly 
bodies and the earth to have been created at the indefinitely 
distant time designated by the word 'beginning,' and that the 
darkness described on the evening of the first day was a tem- 
porary darkness produced by the accumulation of dense 
vapfors ' upon the face of the deep,' an incipient dispersion 
of these vapors may have readmitted light to the earth upon 
the first day, while the exciting cause of light was still ob- 
scured ; and the farther purification of the atmosphere upon 
the fourth day may have caused the sun and moon and stars 
to reappear in the firmament of heaven, to assume their new 
relations to the newly modified earth and to the human race. 
We have evidence of the presence of light during long and 
distant periods of time, in which the many extinct fossil 
forms of animal life succeeded one another upon the early 
surface of the globe. This evidence consists in the petrified 

29 



450 THE HARMONY OF 

remains of eyes of animals found in geological formations 
of various ages." 

" It appears liiglilj probable, from recent discoveries, that 
light is not a material substance, but only an eftect of undula- 
tions of ether ; that this infinitely subtle and elastic ether per- 
vades all space, and even the interior of all bodies : so long as 
it remains at rest, there is total darkness ; when it is put in a 
peculiar state of vibration, the sensation of light is produced: 
this vibration may be excited by various causes; e.g. by the 
sun, by the stars, by electricity, combustion, etc. If, then, 
light be not a substance, but only a series of vibrations of 
ether, i.e. an eftect produced on a subtle fluid by the excite- 
ment of one or many extraneous causes, it can be hardly said 
to have been created, though it may be literally said to be 
called into action." 

" Lastly, in the reference made in the fourth command- 
ment (Exod. XX. 11) to the six days of the Mosaic creation, 
the word asah, ' made,' is the same which is used in Gen. i. 7, 
and which has been shown to be less strong and less compre- 
hensive than 6ora, 'created;' and, as it by no means necessa- 
rily implies creation out of nothing, it may be here employed 
to express a new arrangement of materials that existed be- 
fore. After all, it should be recollected that the question is 
not respecting the correctness of the Mosaic narrative, but of 
our interpretation of it ; and still further, it should be borne 
in mind that the object of this account was not to state in 
what manner, but by whom, the world was made." 

"i^either the first verse, nor the first half of the secouel," 
says Chalmers, "forms any part of the narrative of the first 
day's operations, — the whole forming a preparatory sentence, 
disclosing to us the initial act of creation at some remote and 
undefined period, and the chaotic state of the world at the 
commencement of those successive acts of ci-eative power by 
which, out of rude and undigested materials, the present har- 
mony of nature was ushered into being. Between the initial 
act and the details of Genesis, the world, for aught we know, 
might have been the theater of many revolutions, the traces 
of which geology may still investigate." 



SCIEXCE AND BEVELATIOX. 451 

Our object, in these extracts from men whose opinion is 
deserving of high consideration, is simply to show that there 
is no inconsistency between revelation and the essential feat- 
ures of geological science. It is enough if it is proved that 
the statements of the one do not, in respect to the antiquity 
of this earth, conflict with the statements of the other. It is 
all-sufficient if the Mosaic narrative is found, in its essential 
features, to correspond with the records of natural science. 
The only apparent difficulty presented is in the light of the 
first day, and the appearance of the sun and moon the fourth 
day; but this difficult}' vanishes upon a careful _ considera- 
tion of the true import of the Mosaic narrative. Recent in- 
vestigations in astronomy have shown the intimate analogy 
of our sun with the fixed stars. It has been proved that the 
stars are suns, like our own, and that variabilit}-, rather than 
uniformity, is the condition of their light : thus, at different 
periods of the world, some stars have, even within the short 
record of man, been found to intermit in their light, to blaze 
forth with unwonted brilliancy, and then suddenly die away 
altogether, or vastly decrease in the light given. 

Says JS'ichol, Professor of Astronomy in Glasgow Univer- 
sity: "The question cannot fail to suggest itself here, 
' whether the sun is now as he ever will be, or only in one state 
or epoch of his efficiency^ as the radiant source of light and 
heat.' The new star in Cassiopeia, seen by Tycho, for in- 
stance, indicated some o^reat chans^e in the lio;ht and heat 
of an orb. That star never moved from its place ; and during 
its course from extreme brilliancy to apparent extinction, the 
color of its light altered, passing through the hues of a dying 
conflagration.'' 

Here have we facts unquestionable of astronomy, showing 
that suns in their light at different epochs may and do pass 
through an amazing change. Some are relighted and some 
extinguished. Thus, the sun is a light-bearer; and why may it 
not at the great epoch of the six days' creation, during the pe- 
riod of chaos and darkness, have been obscured or previously 
been in a mighty transition from light to darkness ? Why 
may not the chaotic state of the preadamite earth have been 



452 THE HABMONT OF 

owing to one of those vast catastrophes that sucldenlj^, throiigli 
the loss of the heat and light of the sun, have thrown all 
things into darkness and chaotic confusion? Why should our 
sun prove an exception to other suns ? If this hypothesis 
cannot be proved, it may be safely said that it cannot be dis- 
proved. There is every analogy in science to f\ivor it, and 
nothing against it. Thus, the more we study the true import 
of revelation the more clearly do we discover the real har- 
mony existing between it and science. Wliile the Bible does 
not profess to give a treatise upon the sciences, there yet is 
nothing to conflict with them ; and where it does speak out, 
all its allusions are such as make known its orio;in from God. 
" There is, then," says the eloquent Gaussen, " no physical 
error in the Scriptures; and this great fact becomes always 
more admirable in proportion as it is more clearly contem- 
plated. Xever will you find a single sentence in opposition 
to the just notions which science has imparted to us con- 
cerning the form of our globe, its magnitude and its geology, 
— upon the void and upon space, — upon the planets and their 
masses, their courses, their dimensions, or their influences, 
— upon the suns which people the depths of space, upon their 
number, their nature, their immensity. You shall not find 
one of the authors of the Bible who has, in speaking of the 
visible world, let fall from his pen one only of those sentences 
which in other books contradict the reality of facts ; none 
who make the heavens a firmament, as do the Seventy, St. Je- 
rome, and all the fathers of the church ; none who make the 
world, as Plato did, an intelligent animal; none who reduce 
everything below, to the four elements of the ancients ; not 
one who has spoken of the mountains as Mohammed did, of 
the cosmogony as BufFon, of the antipodes as Lucretius, as 
Plutarch, as Pliny, as Lactantius, as St. Augustine, as the 
Pope Zachara. When the Scriptures speak of the form of 
the earth, the}' make it a globe ; when they speak of the posi- 
tion of this globe in the bosom of the universe, they suspeyid 
it upon nothing. When they speak of its age, not only do 
they put its creation, as well as that of the heavens, in the 
' beginning,' — that is, before the ages which they cannot or 



SCIENCE AND REVELATION. 453 

will not number, — but they are also careful to place it before 
the breaking up of chaos and the creation of man, the crea- 
tion of angels, of archangels, of principalities and powers, 
their trial, the fall of some and their ruin, the perseverance 
of others and their glory. When they speak of the heavens, 
they employ to designate and define them the most philo- 
sophic and the most eloquent expression w^hich the Greeks 
in the Septuagint translation, the Latin Vulgate, and all the 
Christian fathers in their discourses, have pretended to im- 
prove, and which they have distorted because it seemed to 
them opposed to the science of their day. The heavens in the 
Bible are ' the expanse,' they are the vacant space, or ether, 
or immensity, and not the ' firmamentum' of Jerome, nor 
the ' ffzepiojiia of the Alexandrian interpreters, nor the eighth 
heaven, firm^ solid, crystalline, and incorruptible, of Aristotle 
and of all the ancients; and although the Hebrew term, so re- 
markable, recurs seventeen times in the Old Testament, and 
the Seventy have rendered it seventeen times by ' arepiw/ia 
(firmament), never have the Scriptures in the I^ew Testament 
used this expression of the Greek interpreters in this sense. 
When they speak of the air, the gravify of lohich w^as 
unknown before Galileo, they tell us that at the creation 
* God gave to the air its weight.^ (Job, xxvii. 5.) When they 
speak of the light, they present it to us as an element inde- 
pendent of the sun, and as anterior by three epochs to the 
period in which that luminary was formed. When they 
speak of the interior state of our globe, they teach us that 
while its surface gives us bread, ' beneath it is on fire.' (Job, xxvii. 
5.) When the}^ speak of the mountains, thej^ distinguish 
them as primary and secondary; they represent them as being 
born; they make them rise; they abase the valleys ; they speak 
as a geological poet of our day would do: 'The mountains 
were lifted up (elevated), Lord ; the valleys were abased 
(Hebrew, " descended") in the place which thou hadst as- 
signed them.' " 

Thus do science and revelation w^alk together in harmony, 
both pointing to the same glorious power and wisdom, reveal- 
ing the same infinite Author, and urging to Christian duty 
with the tokens of an ever-present God. 



CHAPTER XVI. 

THE UNITY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 

The doctrine of the Bible upon the origin of the human 
family is, that the whole race of man proceeded from Adam 
and Eve ; that their lirst home was the garden of Eden ; their 
condition one of perfect innocence, and as they came from 
the hands of God they had enstamped upon them the image 
of their Maker, and were alike sinless and free in the ex- 
ercise of their natural powers. As such, of their own free- 
dom, as responsible moral agents, they fell from their high 
estate, and thus brought upon themselves the punishment 
of sin. 

Is there anything in the condition of the human family to 
disprove this statement? anything to show the Mosaic re- 
cord false ? It will be our design to reply to this question. 
If history, so far as it can be relied upon, confirms the record 
of Moses, if the researches of science can show nothing in the 
diversity of the human race to disprove this statement, then 
have we a high proof of the genuineness of the Mosaic his- 
tory, and additional argument to confirm the inspiration of 
the Bible. 

Consider, in the first place, that all the earliest accounts 
of the origin of man point to a first period of innocence and 
happiness. The golden age of the poets of antiquity pointed 
to such a period. The traditions of the earliest state of man all 
had reference to a condition difterent from his present state. 
As the majestic columns of some ancient temple, that lie 
scattered upon the ground, point out the grandeur of its 
former state, so, also, there is that in human nature that 
seems to intimate that man is but a wreck of what he 
once was, and that he only carries about with him the rem- 
nants of his original glory. Thus, as we study the tra- 
(454) 



THE UNITY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 455 

ditions of history or look to man in his present condition, 
there is nothing to disprove the Mosaic record, but rather 
much to confirm it. Among the many events of history, few 
can surpass in interest the occasion when Paul for the first 
time addressed the learned Athenians. Ascending the steps 
of the Areopagus, there was presented to his eye a scene of 
nature unequaled in majesty and loveliness. There lay be- 
hind him the JtCgean Sea. Upon Mars Hill stood the famed 
temple of ancient idolatry. Before him were gathered the 
inquisitive, the imaginative, the pleasure-loving Athenians. 
Among them were the philosophers, and such as delighted 
in tlie arts and those works of beauty for which the land of 
Greece was renowned. But what was the mission of Paul? 
It was to teach doctrines, to advance opinions, opposed to all 
their previous habits of thought, their ancient customs, their 
religion, and their habitual life. It was to show their whole 
system of idol-worship wrong, their whole theology based 
upon error. It was to reveal the one infinite God, the one 
perfect atonement of Christ, and that only system of redemp- 
tion by which man can be saved. It was to make known the 
unity of the human family as descended from one common 
parentage and having one common blood. It was to make 
clear the great truth that man was involved in the ruin of the 
same fall, and had the same duties to perform, and the same 
immortality of blessedness to secure, and greatness of misery 
to avoid. But the unity of the human race, as descended 
from Adam and Eve, was an idea foreign to the proud Athe- 
nians. They gloried in an origin distinct from that of other 
nations. They regarded themselves as auroyOoveq, sprung from 
the sacred soil of Attica, underived, and independent of 
other families of mankind. Paul considered it essential to 
Christianity to show that the unity of the divine nature in- 
volved the unity of the human, and that the oneness of the 
race involved the oneness of the source from which the race 
sprang. " God, that made the world and all things therein, 
hath made of one hlood 2M nations of men for to dwell on all 
the face of the earth ; and hath determined the times before 
appointed, and the bounds of their habitation." 



456 THE UNITY OF 

Thus the unity of the human race was by Paul regarded 
as essential to the system of redemption by Christ, since that 
redemption was based upon the idea of one common ex- 
posure to ruin, through the fall of one common parentage : 
this is seen in the parallel run at length between the fall of the 
race in Adam, and its redemption in Christ. Thus, the apos- 
tle, in Romans, declares, "By one man sin entered into the 
world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men." 
"As by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, 
so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous." 
"For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be 
made alive." "The first man Adam was made a living 
soul, the last Adam was made a quickening spirit." Thus, 
in the universal headship of the one we see the counterpart 
in the universal headship of the other. We do not attempt 
to define the mysterious relation Adam sustained to the 
human family. It is not our object to illustrate in its essen- 
tial elements the oneness of the human race through a 
common parentage. \Ye only state that the Scripture lan- 
guage unequivocally asserts that oneness. It declares the fact 
of a descent from Adam, the first man, of all the nations of 
the earth ; it asserts that as sin was introduced by the first 
man, so was redemption by the second man, Christ; it com- 
pares the two together, contrasts the difterence of each, and 
most plainly asserts but one common father of the whole 
human race. Now, this truth stands upon the same ground 
as do all the revealed truths of the Bible. It is most inti- 
mately linked w^th the inspiration of the word of God. It is 
asserted not only in Genesis, but implied in every book of 
the Bible. E'ot a single intimation is there to the contrary in 
any book of the Bible. Thus the plenary inspiration of the 
Scriptures must be shown to be erroneous, before the fact of 
a common origin can be disproved, even if its general inspi- 
ration is admitted; because the unity of the human race is 
one great link in the chain to show the fullest inspiration of 
the Bible. 

If, then, history and the Bible point to the central region 
of Asia as the cradle of the human race, — if early tradition 



TSE HUMAN BACE. 457 

in all the works of ancient philosophers and poets speak of a 
golden age of innocence, and correspond in their essential 
features with the account of inspiration, — must not the most 
demonstrative, the most irresistible evidence be presented to 
lead us to doubt a fact admitted so universally in all ages of 
the world ? 

Is it enough to raise objections only from the diversity in 
the human family ? Are we to throw every evidence from 
history and revelation away, because of the cavils of modern 
skepticism upon this subject? Who knows not how easy it 
is to raise objections upon all subjects? Who is ignorant 
how common doubt is ? If some students of science please 
to question the parentage of man from Adam, is it not equally 
evident how unanimous has been the opinion of the wisest 
and the best in every age in confirmation of the oneness of 
the family of man as coming from a single stock ? But, 
leaving the ground of inspiration, let us see if upon the 
ground alone of science the descent of the human family 
from one stock can be disproved. 

We will first see if there are greater varieties in the human 
species than among the different species of animals ; if so, are 
those varieties so peculiar and distinct as to authorize the 
setting aside of the voice of history and revelation ? Now, it 
can be most clearly proved that the varieties of animals of 
the lower species are as great and even far greater than exist 
in the human species; and that also among existing varieties 
the distinction is not so marked among men as among quad- 
rupeds. Thus we must in consistency believe that the human 
species had a common parentage, even as all other distinct 
species of animals, if we repudiate the idea of a distinct 
parentage for every variety of animals. We cannot suppose 
that the most marked peculiarities of the human species 
had each a distinct creation, any more than the most marked 
peculiarities of the dog race or the cat race. But this is 
not all. Varieties of form, color, size, strength, and intel- 
ligence among the different species of animals are so 
blended gether in each that it is impossible to say where 
the creation of these distinct species, or varieties, com- 



458 THE UNITY OF 

menced. One man may make out two, another ^s^q, and 
another ten distinct creations for each prominent variety in 
each species; and yet some other student, progressing farther 
in science, may even double the number. Where is this sub- 
division of creation among the varieties of species to end ? So 
of the human species : upon the ground of a common origin 
from one stock, we can find no difiiculty with the existing 
varieties of the race of man ; but, if we must go to a diflferent 
creation for each of the most prominent varieties, we know not 
where to stop. The varieties of form, color, strength, intel- 
ligence, are so infinite in their minute shades, these varieties 
so blend with one another, that the most difiicult of tasks is 
to separate each prominent variety. IIow, upon the score of 
ease in classifying the varieties of the human family, are we 
bettered when we resort to the theory of five or six diflerent 
origins? We must, in consistency, carry out the same prin- 
ciple in classifying the varieties of each species of animals. 
What are we to do in determining how few or how many are 
the diverse creations in each species ? Thus we see at once 
how inextricable is the confusion that arises from attempting 
to make out so many dift'erent origins in the human famil}^ 
What prevents the same principle of analogy from holding 
equall}^ good in the existing varieties of animals? lN"ow, in the 
strict nomenclature of science, a species is a class of animals 
having a descent from one stock : if, then, we ignore the idea 
of the human race coming from one stock, wh}^, when greater 
varieties can be shown in the species of animals, are we to 
single out the human race as an exception? Why are we 
to resort to a kind of argument with the race of man that 
we do not follow out with the race of dogs, cats, lions, or 
horses? 

There are two great laws in respect to species. One is 
that each species, within certain limits, is susceptible of in- 
finite variety ; another law is, that beyond those limits each 
species remains permanent, with rigid adherence to an unde- 
viating law of development. Thus, we may see a vast variety 
of dogs, but no dog ever emerges into the sheep, no sheep 
ever puts on the features of the cat. E'ature has interposed 



THE HUMAN RACE. 459 

an impassable barrier to eacb species of animals, so that 
amalgamation is impossible; and thus there can be no inter- 
change with each species. Thus, by the law of variety, we 
see a most happy adaptation to the difierences of climate and 
country ; while, by the law of development of species, there 
are no monstrosities in nature and no compounding of 
original differences. By the one law we have a most useful 
facility of being conformed to the varied climates and 
countries of the earth, while by the other law is preserved 
the harmony of animal existence. With the first law domes- 
ticity and migration are possible, and with the latter the 
peculiarities of each species are permanently retained. Both 
are indispensable. We see that nature has implanted an 
invincible repugnance to union among the different species, 
and given to each species an undeviating character of one- 
ness. The law of organic life is that each species shall pro- 
pagate its kind, and no other; and whatever apparent ex- 
ceptions may exist, we know the limit of development is 
exceedingly contracted, and that, as in the case of mules and 
hybrid plants and animals, there is wanting the power of 
reproduction. Consequently, the race becomes extinct, and 
the hybrid is incapable of establishing a new species. The 
question, then, to decide is. Are there greater varieties 
among the human species than among the species of quad- 
rupeds ? If the varieties of animals in each species are as 
great, or greater than in the human race, then, if we admit 
that species means the descent from one stock, we cannot 
with any shadow of reason doubt that the human race 
came from one stock. Varieties of species are formed from 
an endless diversity of circumstances. I^ot only are cli- 
mate, domestication, country, the intermingling with dif- 
ferent varieties of the same species, to be considered, but 
occasional accidents without any known cause. Thus, 
in 1791, upon the farm of Seth "Wright, of Massachusetts, 
one ewe gave birth to a male lamb which had a longer body 
and shorter legs than the rest of the breed, with the fore-legs 
crooked. This form making it impossible for the sheep to 
leap fences, it was resolved to perpetuate this accidental 



460 THE UNITY OF 

variety, which was accordingly done. Thus, also, a race of 
swine with solid hoofs arose in Hungary in the same way ; 
and recently, without any assignable cause, the same singular 
variety has made its appearance along the banks of the Red 
River, in our own country. The Spaniards, when they dis- 
covered this country, found none of the domestic animals 
existing here which were used in Europe. They were 
accordingly introduced, and, escaping, strayed from their 
owners and ran wild in the forest, and have thus continued 
for several centuries. The result is, the obliteration of the 
characteristics of the domesticated animals, and a reappear- 
ance of some of the typal marks of the wild state, and a 
generation of new and striking characteristics, in accommo- 
dation to their new circumstances. 

^' The wild hog of our forests," says T. V. Moore, ''bears 
a striking likeness to the wild boar of the Old World. 
The hog of the high mountains of Parumus resembles the 
wild boar of France. Instead of being covered with bristles, 
however, as the domestic breed from which they sprang, 
they have a thick fur, often crisp, and sometimes an under- 
coat of wool. Instead of being generally wdiite or spotted, 
they are uniformly black, except in some warmer regions, 
where they are red, like the young peccary. The anatomical 
structure has changed, adapting itself to the new habits of 
the animal, in an elongation of the snout, a vaulting of the 
forehead, a lengthening of the hind legs ; and, in the case of 
those left on the island of Cubagua, a monstrous elongation 
of the toes to half a span. The ox has undergone the same 
changes. In some of the provinces of South America a 
variet}' has been produced called ' prelones,' having a very 
rare and fine fur. In other provinces a variety is produced 
with an entirely naked skin, like the dog of Mexico or of 
Guinea. In Columbia, owing to the immense size of farms 
and other causes, the practice of milking was laid aside ; and 
the result has been that the secretion of milk in the cows, 
like the same function in other animals of this class, is only 
an occasional phenomenon, and confined strictly to the period 
of suckling the calf. As soon as the calf is removed, the 



THE HUMAN BACE. 461 

milk ceases to flow, as in the case of other mammals. The 
same changes have taken place in other animals. The wild 
dog of the Pampas never barks, as the domestic animal 
does, but howls like the wolf; while the wild cat has, in like 
manner, lost the habit of caterwauling. The wild horse of 
the higher plains of South America becomes covered with a 
long, shaggy fur, or is of a uniform chestnut color. The 
sheep of the central Cordilleras, if not shorn, produces a 
thick, matted, woolly fleece, which gradually breaks oflP in 
shagg}^ tufts, and leaves underneath a short, fine hair, 
shining and smooth, like that of the goat, and the wool 
never reappears. The same changes have been produced in 
geese and gallinaceous fowls. A variety has sprung up 
called rumpless fowls, which want from one to six of the 
caudal vertebrae. The same varieties have sprung up in 
other parts of the world. The fat-tailed sheep of Tartary 
loses its posterior mass of fat when removed to the steppes 
of Siberia, whose scant and bitter herbage is less favorable 
to the secretion of adipose matter. The African sheep has 
become large, like the goat, and exchanged its wool for hair. 
TheWallachian sheep has put on large, perpendicular, spiral 
horns, and in like manner become clothed with hair. Some 
also have four, and even six, horns. The wild horses of 
Eastern Siberia have the same anatomical differences from 
the tame ones that we noticed in the case of the swine ; and 
culture, climate, and other causes have produced the widest 
varieties, — from the little, shaggy pony of the Shetlands, 
that scrambles up the highland crags like a goat, to the 
gigantic steed of Flanders, or the Conestoga of Pennsyl- 
vania, which will sometimes drag a load of four tons on the 
level ground. Whether the dog and the Avolf are of the same 
species, is a question about which there is some difference of 
opinion among naturalists ; but there is a very general agree- 
ment that all varieties of the dog must be referred to one 
species. Between these there is the widest difference, — from 
the gigantic St. Bernard, that will carry a frozen traveler to the 
convent; the shaggy !N'ewfoundland, with his webbed feet 
and his aquatic habits; and the scentless and almost tongue- 



462 THE UNITF OF 

less greyhound ; to the little lapdog that nestles in a lady's 
arms, the nosing foxhound, whose scent is almost a miracle, 
the ratting terrier, and the naked Mexican dog, that has an 
additional toe. The cow presents the most diverse varieties, — 
from the little Surat ox, not larger than a dog, to the humped 
and long-eared Brahmin cow, and the gigantic prize ox that 
will weigh two tons. The domesticated fowls and pigeons 
have assumed varieties enough to fill a page, some of them 
of the most diverse character ; varying from the largest size 
to the most dwarfish, and possessing every peculiarity com- 
patible with the preservation of the species, in the feathers, 
the form, the wattles, and the psychological traits and habits." 

From this brief summary of facts, is there any greater 
variety among the human species than exists in the different 
species of the lower orders of animals? Are we to infer that 
the diversities of color and form are as great even as exist 
in the species of the dog, the cat, the sheep, and the ox? 
The resemblances in all essential respects are identical in the 
human race. The race presents only varieties of form and 
color that cannot compare, in extent and diversity, to the 
varieties existing in the difiPerent species of animals. 

Observe that the range of circumstances for the existence 
of the human family is vastly greater than for that of any 
other species of animals. Man exists all over the earth, and 
yet there is not in any respect so marked a difference as exists 
among the varieties of an}^ one extended species of animals. 
Why, then, when there are greater reasons for varieties of 
the human family from greater combination of circumstances, 
and yet not so great or prominent distinctions as are mani- 
fested in the species of animals, should we, against the voice 
of history and inspiration, attempt to designate different ori- 
gins to the human race, and not do the same w^ith the varie- 
ties of the species of dog, cat, sheep, and oxen ? Why is 
skepticism reasonable upon the subject of man's single 
parentage in denying it altogether, and unreasonable when 
it uses the same argument in respect to the varieties existing 
among the different species of animals? Why should we 
doubt the origin of all the human race from Adam, and 



THE HUMAN BACE. 463 

not believe that the fuDcIamental idea of species among ani- 
mals forbids the supposition of distinct creations for each ex- 
isting variety in the human family, as it does in the particu- 
lar species of animals and birds ? 

The argument is simply this. Believing that the wide- 
spread varieties among each species of animals must all, 
from the fundamental idea of species^ proceed from one com- 
mon stock, then, there being no greater, or even so great 
varieties in the human species as in the lower species of ani- 
mals, it follows conclusively that the human race also came 
from one stock. But there are those who deny the premises 
upon which the argument from natural causes is built to es- 
tablish the fact of the unity of the human race. We then 
will take those who claim for the wide varieties of animals 
a distinct creation, and, consequently, a distinct creation for 
the fundamental varieties of the human species, upon their 
own ground, and show that even there the unity of the human 
race cannot be disproved. 

Those who deny the oneness of the origin of man claim 
at least four marked varieties among the human species as 
having each a distinct creation. These are the Caucasian 
race, the Mongolian, the Indian, and the African race. The 
advocate for the distinct creation of the parentage of each of 
these races must also, in consistency, admit a distinct creation 
for all the existing varieties that are most marked of the dif- 
ferent species of animals. All admit creation by miracle of 
every species of animals. The question is, are the varieties 
also created by miracle ? Are they also placed by miracle 
in their peculiar locations? Miracle, if it means anything, is 
something that supersedes or transcends natural law. We 
do not say the hair grows by miracle, but by the agency of 
natural law. What is miracle is the creation of man or the cre- 
ation of the different species of animals. Natural law cannot 
create: it may perpetuate existence, but it never can give it. 
Whoever reads the Bible must be impressed wdth the fact 
that miracle is never resorted to except in extreme emer- 
gencies and under the most imperious circumstances. It 
comes in only as an extraordinary event when natural causes 



464 THE VNITY OF 

are perfectly inadequate to effect objects the most desirable. 
Tkus, tlie creation of the world, of the first parents, of each 
species, and the resurrection of Christ, were miracles simply 
because natural causes were perfectly inadequate for such 
events. Bnt where do we find miracle resorted to except when 
absolutely necessary ? Where do we find the course of nature 
interrupted, and its uniformity broken in upon, except under 
circumstances the most extraordinary, and only when the 
sphere of law was too limited to effect objects of transcend- 
ent importance ? 

One great objection to so many distinct creations among 
men and animals is, that there is a superfluity of miracle. It 
has already been seen that variety among species is a law as 
needful as the law of propagation of distinct species. Variety 
subserves purposes as useful within a certain sphere, as uni- 
formity out of that sphere. TVe can well imagine the neces- 
sity for a great variety of dogs, cats, horses, oxen, and sheep; 
l;)ut we are at a loss to conceive of the benefit of an amalga- 
mation together of all these five species. It is very service- 
able to have so great a diversity in each species, but very 
unserviceable to have one species confounded with another. 
There is a vast difference between diversity and monstrosity. 
Suppose we believe that natural causes, such as climate, habits 
of life, domestication, locality, etc., are not sufficient to ac- 
count for the wide diversity existing among the species of 
animals; does the distinct creation of the fundamental varie- 
ties of each species of dogs, cats, horses, oxen, and sheep, by 
miracle, present with the placing of them in different locali- 
ties a hypothesis as natural, as free from objection, as con- 
sistent with natural history and revelation, as the hypothesis 
that God, when he created each species of animals, created 
with that species a principle of variety, not simply dependent 
upon natural causes, but to a certain extent of greater inherent 
potency, which, combined with natural causes, would even- 
tuate at the necessary period in all the needful diversity of 
species ? Call this principle, if you choose, miraculous inter- 
position, yet it is vastly more simple, more free from objec- 
tion, more in accordance with natural history and the law of 



THE HUMAN RACE, 465 

propagation of species, than the operation of two distinct 
and disconnected influences, first miracles for each variety 
of importance, and then natural causes. 

Reflect upon the vast multiplicity of miracles, and upon the 
cumbersome and complicated agency that is demanded to ac- 
count for the diversities of the species of animals. Reflect 
upon the unnecessary amount of miracle involved in this last 
hypothesis. It is a good rule in philosophy never to bring in 
more causes than are appropriate for a given result. Where is 
the necessity for so many miracles ? It is no reply to this 
objection to ascribe to the believer in the unity of descent 
of each species of animals and of the human race, the empty 
sophism of continued supernatural interposition to bring 
about the existing varieties among the diflferent species of 
animals or of the human race. It is time enough to make 
an assertion when proof is given. "We do not hold to the 
necessity of a constant supernatural intervention to account 
for the varieties of species. AYe believe that at one hold stroke 
God may have implanted in the physical constitution a prin- 
ciple amply sufficient to account for the most wide-spread va- 
rieties among species, in combination with natural causes. 
We believe, if natural causes may not of themselves account 
for these varieties, law may, as originally implanted by a 
supernatural agency in the constitution. Is not this a 
hypothesis far more natural than the twofold multiplicity 
of miracle demanded by the contrary hypothesis, — first, 
that by the distinct creation of fundamental varieties ; 
second, that by the placing of animals in distinct localities? 
Both hypotheses demand miracle; but the question is. Which 
demands the fewest miracles? — which miracles upon the 
most reasonable grounds, and most in harmony with the 
agency of natural causes ? 

The first hypothesis, which combines miracle and natural 
causes together, makes physical law, originally implanted in 
the constitution, the great fact itself of supernatural interpo- 
sition by God; while the latter hypothesis, besides having as 
many dividing lines in the shape of varieties as there are 
hairs upon the head, demands miracles as numerous as the 

30 



466 THE UNITY OF 

fundamental varieties of the human race and the species of 
animals. 

Let us now confine our attention to the race of man. It is 
objected to the theory of natural causes and of accidental 
varieties that they are ^insufficient to account for the four 
great races included in the Caucasian, the Mongolian, the 
Indian, and the African race. Let us, for argument's sake, 
admit the objection. But does it prove four distinct crea- 
tions? Far from it. There must yet be proved, from other 
and different sources, four distinct creations. It is not 
enough to batter down the argument of natural causes or 
accidental varieties. The fact must be shown that history 
and inspiration are friendly to this hypothesis. If both are 
opposed to it, then there remains a hypothesis that must be 
overthrown, or all the learned disquisitions to the contrary 
amount to nothing. What matters the insufficiency of na- 
tural causes or incidental varieties, if but one solitary fact 
well attested arrays its bold front against the hypothesis of 
different creations? What matters it, provided upon the 
score of miracle the unity of the human race from one origin 
is more natural, through the supposition of one great law of 
miracle originally implanted, and if also, upon that of history 
and revelation, this unity of origin is doubly confirmed ? Are 
facts to give place to fanciful theories ? Are novelties of 
science to browbeat all sober science, and with it also the 
voice of history and revelation ? 

There are those at the present day who think they can 
give proof of Moses tripping up upon great spiritual facts 
of science and history. But Moses is a far more stubborn 
authority than many are sufficiently aware of; and a man 
may as well make up his mind to encounter the lightnings 
of Sinai as to demonstrate in a blunder this greatest sage 
of antiquity. We have read of the weak sophism that 
Moses only intended to teach great moral truths, and not 
science. This, however, is not the question. The ques- 
tion is. Did Moses, in fact, teach any physical error f Did 
Moses inculcate anything opposed to the clear truths of 
geology, astronomy, chemistry, and natural history ? This is 



THE HUMAN RACE. 467 

the question. [N'ot what Moses designed to teach, but what in 
fact he did teach. Believing that not a single error can be 
found in all his writings, we will not admit in him blunders 
without proof. If God gave him inspiration enough to 
teach moral truths, and great facts of history from the 
earliest ages, he gave him inspiration enough to avoid 
making physical blunders that w^ould inevitably, in a later 
day, be made the excuse for rejecting his morality and his 
history in one lump, and with it undermining the whole su- 
perstructure of the Bible as inspired by God. Inspiration 
has as much to do in keeping from all error as in imparting 
truth ; and we will not bow to the dogmatism of those skep- 
tics who think they have done Moses a vast favor by indors- 
ing alone, with a patronizing air, his morality and civil code. 
Whether Moses was. learned in the neio discoveries of modern 
times or not, he was made by God sufficiently learned not to 
bring into disrepute the Bible by arraying it against the 
absolute truth of science. Let us, then, briefly look to two 
sources of evidence, to show the unity of the human race, as 
descended from one stock : 

1st. History. 

2d. Miraculous interposition, in combination with natural 
law. 

" We find," says Layard, " that it has been assumed and 
reasoned upon, as an admitted fact, that Egypt was first 
peopled from Ethiopia proper, — that is, from the countries to 
the south of it. That Egypt was settled by the children of 
Mizraim, the second son of Ham, is universally admitted. 
But that the land from whence they came and peopled 
Egypt was Ethiopia, is not made probable by any good evi- 
dence. It has been supposed that Meroe, the capital of Ethi- 
opia, was the cradle of Thebes, and that the nation of the Ethi- 
opians lived under a civil and religious system identical with 
that of Egypt, long before Egypt was inhabited. But there 
are many monumental and historical evidences to the con- 
trary. The pyramids were, by the unanimous tradition of 
the Egyptian priests, the oldest monuments of Egypt; but 
they are not in the neighborhood of Thebes, but of Memphis, 
on the crown of the delta, on the east bank of the Mle. 



468 THE UmTY OF 

^' The first mortal who ruled Egypt, according to Manetho, 
was Menes. This name occurs at the head of a procession 
of statues of the kings of Egypt, depicted on one of the 
walls of the palace of Luxor, at Thebes. This king is said 
to have laid the foundation of Memphis, which was hitherto 
a marsh, by means of embankments, lakes, and other arti- 
ficial means. Josephus, the Jewish historian, informs us that 
he lived many years before the times of Abraham. From 
the monuments of Ethiopia the inference from the inscrip- 
tions is that they were among, the most ancient erected in 
the eighteenth dynasty of the kings of Egypt, who reigned 
long after Egypt became a settled kingdom. They also 
intimate plainly that Ethiopia was a province or dependency 
of Egypt, and continued apparently so until the Psammeticus, 
about five hundred years before Christ. The picture of a 
pyramid forms a part of the hieroglyphic name of Memphis, 
and the inference is, from the immutability of all things in 
Egypt, that the foundation of the pyramids was coeval with' 
that of the city. The form of the temple of Bel us, at Baby- 
lon, according to Herodotus, was pyramidal. It is also an 
ascertained fact that the ancient idolatries, all over the world, 
particularly' affected this form in their sacred edifices. These 
circumstances, with others, render it probable that the temple 
of Belus served for an example and pattern of the pyramids 
of Egypt. Thus, the early migration to Egypt was not from 
Ethiopia, but the plain of Shinar, or from the banks of the 
Euphrates, where once stood the city of Babylon, near the 
place of the tower of Babel. It was soon after the confusion 
of tongues that befell the impious builders of Babel, about 
two thousand two hundred and sixty-six years before Christ, 
that we have good evidence to believe there first proceeded 
the emigration to Egypt, and the settlement of the country. 
We must look to the Bible for our clearest light upon the 
first settlement of Egypt." 

Before the confusion of tongues there was but one language 
spoken. We know that the plain of Shinar was the place 
where the tower of Babel was built. It was then from an- 
cient Assyria, in the land of Chaldea, that civilization and 



TEE HUMAN RACE. 469 

the arts came to Egypt, and all the mouumeDtal evidences 
of Egypt evince the fact, so clearly established in the Bible, 
that its early origin is to be attributed not to a roving tribe 
dwelling in Ethiopia, but to the builders of the tower of 
Babel or their immediate descendants. 

There is one strong probability, from the comparison be- 
tween the ancient language of the Egyptians and that of the 
Shemitic race, through the line of the ancient Hebrews. 
There can be no doubt that the oris-in of lano-uap'e with al- 
phabetical characters could not be of mere human invention. 
Without a written language, society goes back to barbarism. 
!N'ow, it was not from the savage state, but from the civilized 
state, that all nations had their origin. The fact that before 
the confusion of Babel the earth was of one tongue implies a 
high degree of civilization. Without a common language 
there could be no union and no great undertaking. The im- 
pious attempt to build a tower for idolatrous purposes, with 
the monumental evidences of it, and all the intimations of 
sacred and profane history, shows this. One great effect of 
the confusion of tongues, and the dispersion of those en- 
gaged in erecting the tower of Babel, would be to bring on, 
in the course of time, an uncivilized state. It is clearly 
shown in the Scriptures that the -descendants of Shem re- 
tained longer than those of Ham or Japheth the knowledge 
of God, and were to a greater extent free from idolatry. 

The inference must be plain, that the curse of the confu- 
sion of tongues would rest more lightly upon them than upon 
those who descended from Ham and Japheth. The descend- 
ants of Shem have always w^ritten alphabetically the most 
perfect kind of writing. 

The Shemitic race was permitted to take up their residence 
not far removed from the scene of the confusion of tongues. 
But the unhappy sons of Mizraim, the son of Ham, appear 
to have wandered forth from their habitation disabled from 
any longer articulating the sounds of that which has been 
the language of the w^hole human race. 

When w^e have arrived at the great fact that Egypt was 
settled not by a roving tribe of Ethiopians, but by the im- 



470 THE UNITY OF 

mediate descenaauts of the builders of the tower of Babel 
upon the plain of Shinar, then, knowing the origin of one of 
the most ancient of the nations of antiquity, we have a 
stand-point of the highest value in tracing the historic unity 
of the human family as descended from one stock. Two 
great events are clearly proved by sacred and profane his- 
tory : first the deluge, and then the confusion of tongues upon 
the plain of Shinar, two thousand two hundred and sixty-six 
years before Christ. 

We will not enter upon the disputed question of the extent 
of the deluge ; the only fact of material importance to know 
is, whether it was so universal as to drown all the existing 
families of the earth but one, that of IS"oah. We have not 
the slightest proof that any of the antediluvians survived the 
flood except the family of Noah. Sacred history is strength- 
ened by profane history in the position that this great catas- 
trophe completed the ruin of all but one family of the ante- 
diluvians. Great speculations have been made to show the 
vast extent of the population of the world at the time of the 
flood; but, in our opinion, the number of the antediluvians 
was far less than is commonly supposed. From the great 
longevity of the inhabitants before the flood, Methuselah 
being removed but three generations from Adam, we know 
that the ratio of increase could not correspond with that which 
exists under our short-lived generations, which, upon the 
most liberal calculation, do not extend over thirty-five years 
as an average. 

The drowning of the Old World must, according to the in- 
timations of history, have swept away a population that was 
mostly included in a comparatively limited extent of country. 
That event taking place, according to the common chro- 
nology, in the year of the world 1788, we have only one hun- 
dred and thirty-two years intervening from the flood to the 
building of Babel and the confusion of tongues ; and we are 
informed that iToah lived after the flood three hundred and 
fifty years. The evidence, then, is very clear that we have 
first the year of the world 1656, or nearly that, to show that 
the deluge swept off* a race of men evidently in their Ian- 



THE HUMAN RACE. 471 

guage homogeneous, and in their local residence living near 
together. And then to show also that there was hut one lan- 
guage and nation upon the earth, we have another period, 
the building of the tower of Babel and the confusion of 
tongues, one hundred and thirty-two years after, and, accord- 
ing to the common reckoning, two hundred and eighteen 
years before the death of Noah. Admitting the longevity of 
the antediluvians, we are distinctly informed that the whole 
earth was of one language and of one speech, in the first verse 
of the eleventh of Genesis, and in the eighth and ninth verses 
of the same chapter, we are also told that the " Lord scat- 
tered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth, 
and they left off to build the city. Therefore is the name of 
it called Babel; because the Lord did there confound the 
language of all the earth." 

Now, history, both sacred and profane, assures us that the 
three sons of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, were, with 
their immediate descendants, each, a few years after the con- 
fusion of tongues, the patriarchs of three great divisions of 
the earth, not exclusively^ but generally., the original founders 
of Asia, Africa, and Europe. To Shem, with his grandsons, 
was portioned out Asia, to Ilani Africa, to Japheth Europe. 
The issue of the three sons of Noah, as they are set down in 
Holy Writ, are, commencing with Japheth, — the sons Gomer, 
Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras. From 
Gomer descended the Cimbrians; from Magog the Scyth- 
ians and Turks ; from Madai the Medes ; from Javan the 
lonians, Greeks; from Meshech the Muscovites; from Tiras 
the Thracians. 

The sons of Shem were Asshur, Mynas, or Elam, Ar- 
phaxad, Lud, and Aram. From Asshur came the Assyrians ; 
from Mynas, or Elam, the Persians ; from Arphaxad the Chal- 
deans ; from Lud the Syrians, and from Aram the Aramites. 

The sons of Ham were Gush, Mizraim, Phut, and Canaan. 
From Gush descended Nimrod, from whom came the Ethi- 
opians ; from Mizraim descended the Egyptians ; from 
Phut the Mauritanians; and from Canaan descended the Ca- 
naanites. 



472 THE UNITY OF 

Thus does the voice of history identify the peopling of the 
earth with the descendants of the family of Noah. But that 
famify were evidently homogeneous in their language with the 
antediluvians, and in their features resemhled those who 
were swept away by the flood. 

We have, then, the starting-point of the confusion of 
tongues at Babel, from w^hence to trace the vast differences 
of language that subsequently arose. We know that the 
peopling of the earth and the dispersion of the inhabitants 
over the earth must proceed from necessity, rather than from 
choice. A race of men who are homos^eneous in lan2:uao:e, 
customs, habits, color, etc. do not readily emigrate into dif- 
ferent portions of the world, far apart and separated from 
each other by natural obstacles of great power. Men are 
naturally social in their tendencies, and it is impossible that 
the whole race will -be dismembered, and form separate and 
distinct parties, which diverge from each other with increas- 
ing energy from year to year, unless there are causes of 
mighty efhcacy at work to bring about this end. The con- 
fusion of tongues presents the solution of the most difficult 
problem of history, even the fundamental differences of lan- 
guage. That confusion was effected evidently by miraculous 
agency, and was of such power as to secure the widest dis- 
persion over the earth. It has been seen that Nimrod was 
the father of the Ethiopians, and Mizraim, the second son 
of Ham, of the Egyptians. 

" There is nothing," says Layard, " in history, either sacred 
or profane, or in the traditions handed down to us, against 
attributing the highest antiquity to the Assyrian empire. In 
the land of Shinar, in the country watered by the Tigris and 
the Euphrates, the Scriptures place the earliest habitations 
of the human race. We have evidence that at the earliest 
period the belief was current, both among the Egyptians 
and Jews, that the first settlements were in Assyria, and that 
from Chaldea civilization and the arts and sciences were 
spread over the world. Abraham and his family, above 1900 
years before Christ, migrated from a land already thickly in 
habited and possessing great cities. According to Josephus, 



THE HUMAN RACE. 473 

the four confederate kings who marched in the time of the 
patriarchs against the people of Sodom and the neighboring 
cities were under a king of Assyria whose empire extended 
all over Asia." 

We arrive, then, at a conclusion, confirmed by sacred and 
profane history, that the gross idolatry that prevailed in 
Egypt had its origin in Assyria, and that, as early as the 
time of Abraham, Egypt was far advanced in civilization, 
and even then the seat of monuments pointing out to the 
aged patriarch an origin from the plain of Shinar. The curse 
pronounced against Babylon, consigning one of the most 
fertile portions of the earth to the most fearful desolation, 
lay evidentl}' in a deeper cause than the mere oppression of 
the Jews. Egypt oppressed them more, but its punishment 
has not been so conspicuous. Babylon was far more the 
mother of idolatry than of oppression. Here originated 
those germs of error that found in Egypt so prolific a soil. 
The first settlers on the banks of the ISTile were idolaters. 
From the first truths in respect to God, the immortality of 
the soul, a future state of rewards and punishments, we 
notice upon their monuments the most striking evidence of 
successive stages of degeneracy, by which the earlier intima- 
tions of sacred truth were hidden under a darker robe of 
idolatry. The deification of the sun appears to be the 
earliest form under which idolatry manifested itself. From 
a metaphor, or type of God, the sun became a symbol, an 
image, — God's vicegerent, his living representative, — God 
himself. There is hardly a monument upon which that 
luminarj^ is not represented and invoked as a deity. Thus 
the unity of God was set forth in a way that led the people into 
polytheism, while the real unity of the Deity was known only 
to the priests, and hidden from the common people. The 
result was soon the grossest form of idol worship. Animal 
worship, according to Manetho, was introduced by Chous, the 
second king of the second dynasty. The origin of this appears 
to have been the endeavor to express in their picture-writing 
the various attributes of God, by the delineation of a living 
being possessing, as they fancied, similar attributes. Thus, 



474 THE UNITY OF 

the hawk was the living representative or embodied symbol 
of many gods. In the same spirit of coarse symbolism, the 
vigilance and watchful care of God over the creation were 
degraded into the likeness of a dog. The vengeance of God 
was personified under the form of a crocodile, or an idol 
having the head of this reptile. But the study of the Egyp- 
tian temples reveals the fact that they w^ere acquainted with 
the mysterious truth of the triple existence of God. The 
primary form or antitype of their mythology is a triad of 
divinities, composed of Ammon, the father, Mout, the 
mother, and Chous, the infant son. This triad passes through 
an immense number of intermediate triads, until it reaches 
the earth, where, under the forms of Osiris, Isis, and Horus, 
it becomes incarnate. Thus, the innumerable idols of Egypt 
had their origin from the perversions of sacred truth, and 
reveal the fact that the Land of the Ohaldees — the region 
washed by the Tigris and the Euphrates — was the mother 
of those impious idolatries that brought on the ruin of Nine- 
veh and Babylon. 

We have thus shown that the plain of Shinar, in Chaldea, 
where stood the tower of Babel, evidently points out the 
source of the lirst emigration into Egypt, and was the ear- 
liest cradle of the civilization of the earth. What follows, 
but that to the marked event that brought on the change of 
language and the dispersion over the earth we are to at- 
tribute those essential differences that subsequently have 
characterized the human race ? 

If one clear case of miraculous interposition can be made 
out to account for the diversities of the human language, 
then certainly one of the most marked peculiarities that 
appear in the different nations of the earth can be accounted 
for. We say, then, to him who denies the unity of the race 
from one stock, that, even supposing incidental varieties and 
natural causes not sufficient to account for such a w^ide-spread 
diversity, it does not follow that there are no other causes 
independent of distinct creations, in different localities, to 
account for the wide differences existing in the form, color, 
and anatomical constriction of the diverse nations of the 



THE HUMAN RACE. 475 

earth. Suppose the great law of adaptation, in combination 
with habit, climate, distinct locality, etc., does not clearly 
reveal the secret of human diversities; are we therefore 
driven to the hypothesis of distinct creations at different 
periods of the world ? Certainly not. 

We can trace the thread of history to a period when the 
whole earth was of one language. We can trace the origin 
of nations to the three sons of J^oah and their immediate 
descendants. We can trace upon the monuments of Egypt 
and Assyria the birthplace of these respective countries. 
We can trace the first great break in one universal language. 
We can see miracle as clearly inscribed upon the confusion 
of tongues as upon the first creation of man. We have, 
then, only to say that if the researches of science compel to 
the conclusion that incidental varieties and natural causes 
will not satisfactorily account for the fundamental diver- 
sities existing in the four great races of the earth, there 
remains another hypothesis that must be overturned before 
any good reason can be found for four or more distinct crea- 
tions of man. The miracle invoked to account, if needed, 
for the diversities of the human family at the confusion of 
tongues, in combination with natural causes, is far more 
probable than the contrary hypothesis of varied and distinct 
miracles of creation at different times and in different lo- 
calities. 

The great catastrophe of the confusion of tongues intro- 
ducing with it organic changes and fundamental varieties of 
color and form, to be more permanently developed in after- 
ages in combination with differences of habit, climate, coun- 
try, and other causes, is a hypothesis, to say the least, that 
cannot be shown false. It is vastly more in unison with his- 
tory, sacred and profane ; it is amply sufiicient for the great- 
est changes ; and there is no argument which can avail to 
overthrow it upon the ground of the impotency of natural 
causes. 

Above all things, the voice of history, the earliest tradi- 
tions of mankind, point to the family of Noah as a second 
time peopling the earth, and as the only stock whence 



476 THE UNITY OF THE HUMAN BACE. 

have issued the existing varieties of the race of man ; and 
whoever denies this has a harder task before him to sustain 
his position than ever Pharaoh had in making war against 
the ten plagues of Egypt. 

Thus we see the twofold difficulty to overcome, of those 
who deny the unity of the human race from one common 
parentage. First, they must show, upon the ground of natural 
causes, that the diversities existing in the human species are 
greater than those existing in the species of dogs, horses, 
sheep, oxen, cats, etc. Secondly, they must show that, pro- 
vided the diversities in the human race are greater, or that 
natural causes may not be sufficient to account for them, God 
did not, at the confusion of tongues upon the plain of Shinar, 
by one bold interposition of miracle, in connection with natu- 
ral causes, bring about all the existing varieties in the human 
family. We do not see any necessity for introducing miracle 
at all in securing the known diversity in the human race, for 
we do not see in this race such great varieties as exist in 
the diffi3rent species of animals; but, if miracle must be in- 
voked to account for these varieties among men, yet even 
then we must see that one miracle such as that which took 
place at Babel, is an hypothesis far more reasonable, and 
more in accordance with history, than four, six, or a greater 
number of miracles in the creation, in different parts of the 
earth, of those marked diversities that appear in the human 
family. 



CHAPTER XVII. 

INTEGRITY OF THE SACRED CANON. 

The New Testament canon contains no book written by 
Christ. It consists of five historical books, one propheticaj, 
and twenty-one epistolary. Of the historical books, four, 
called Gospels, are ascribed to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and 
John. They contain brief histories of the life and death of 
Christ, his teachings, and his resurrection. The fifth, called 
the Acts, is ascribed to Luke. Of the Epistles, fourteen are 
ascribed to Paul; the remaining seven, called Catholic^ are as- 
cribed one to James, two to Peter, three to John, and one to 
elude. The only prophetical book is ascribed to John, the 
author of the Gospel and the three Epistles. 

Consider, first, the language and the style. After the con- 
quests of Alexander the Great, the various dialects of the 
Greeks became mingled together and extensively diflPased all 
over the East. The Greek became the court language of the 
Romans in the East. While, therefore, the Syro-Chaldaic, or 
Hebrew, was the vernacular tongue of the Jews who resided 
in Palestine, Greek was extensively spoken as the language 
of commerce. Thus the Greek, partaking of the Jewish 
idiom, was the dialect current at the time, in which are in- 
terspersed some traces of the Latin language. Such is, in 
fact, the language of the New Testament, in its style and 
manner. In its minute correspondences it was just what 
might be expected of the age in which it was written. What 
now is the external evidence of the genuineness of the New 
Testament ? 

Let us commence with the age of the apostles. Barnabas 
of Cyprus is frequently mentioned as a co-laborer of Paul; 
Clement, as a fellow-laborer of Paul, afterward Bishop of 

(477) 



478 INTEGRITY OF THE 

Rome; Hermas, probably the same saluted by Paul in the 
Epistle to the Romans ; Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, in 
Syria, where he is said to have been ordained by Peter ; 
Polycarp, a disciple of John, ordained by him Bishop of 
Smyrna, where he died a martyr ; and Papias, the companion 
of Polycarp. Xow, in the brief writings and fragments of 
these few apostolical fathers which have descended to us we 
find nearly all the books of our New Testament quoted or 
alluded to ; nor did they recognize any other books than 
those in our canon. 

Let us descend a little later into the second century, and 
examine the writings of Justin Martyr, a.d. 140, of Ire- 
nseus, A.D. 178, of Clement of Alexandria, a.d. 194, and of 
Tertullian, a.d. 200. Justin tells us that the memoirs and 
records of the apostles and their companions were read and 
expounded in the assemblies of Christians for divine worship 
on the Sabbath-day. Irenaeus says, " there were but four 
gospels," the same as we now have ; he also says of Poly- 
carp, whom he had seen in his youth, " I can tell the place 
in which the blessed Polycarp sat and taught, and his going 
out and coming in, and the manner of his life, and the form 
of his person, and the discourses he made to the people, 
and how he related his conversation with John and others 
who had seen the Lord, both concerning his miracles and his 
doctrines, as he had received them from the eye-witnesses of 
the word of life ; all which Polycarp related agreeably to the 
Scriptures." 

Of Pol3'carp one undoubted epistle remains; and in this, 
though short, we have about forty clear allusions to the New 
Testament. Twenty-five or thirty-five years after follows 
Justin Martyr, universally known in the ancient Church. In 
his writings are thirty-five plain quotations from the Gospel of 
Matthew alone, and in one part a considerable portion of the 
Sermon on the Mount, in the very words of Matthew. Ire- 
nseus mentions the code of the New Testament as well as the 
Old, and calls the one, as the other, the oracles of God. Says 
Irenseus, " We have not received the knowledge of the way 
of our salvation by any other than those by whom the gospel 



SACBED CANON. 479 

has been brought to us : which gospel they first preached, 
and afterwards by the will of God committed to writing, that 
it might be, for all time to come, the foundation and pillar of 
our faith. For after our Lord arose from the dead, and they 
were endued from above with the power of the Holy Ghost 
coming down upon them, they received a perfect knowledge 
of all things. They then went forth to all the ends of the 
earth, declaring to men the blessing of heavenlypeace, having 
all of them, and every one alike, the gospel of God. Mat- 
thew, then among the Jews, wrote a gospel in their own lan- 
guage, while Peter and Paul were preaching the gospel at 
Rome and founding a church there; and, after their exit, 
Mark, another disciple and interpreter of Peter, delivered to 
us in writing the things that had been preached by Peter ; 
and Luke, the companion of Paul, put down in a book the 
gospel preached by him. Afterward, John, the disciple of 
the Lord, who also leaned upon his breast, likewise pub- 
lished a gospel while he dwelt at Ephesus, in Asia." 

Says Justin Martyr, speaking of the general usage of the 
Christian Church, " The memoirs of the apostles or the writ- 
ings of the prophets are read according as the time allows ; 
and, when the reader has ended, the president makes a dis- 
course." 

Polycarp, a companion of the apostles, says, " I trust ye 
are well exercised in the Holy Scriptures, as in these Scrip- 
tures it is said, * Be ye angry and sin not ;' "* thus showing 
that there were Scripture writings distinguished as the 
"Holy Scriptures." Li the first century we have more than 
two hundred quotations and allusions to our sacred books, in 
which there is an incidental testimon}- more valuable than 
any formal testimony could be. In the second century the 
testimony is more full and express. Of this age there are 
thirty-six writers whose works in some parts have come down 
to us. In the third and fourth centuries there are more than 
one hundred authors whose works testify to the authenticity 
of these books. Dr. Lardner, in speaking of the works of 
Irenseus, Clement of Alexandria, and Tertullian, says, 
" There are perhaps more and larger quotations of the small 



480 INTEGBITY OF THE 

volume of the ^N'ew Testament than of all the works of 
Cicero, though of so uncommon excellence for thought and 
style, in the writers of all characters for several ages." 

There have descended to us thirteen well-authenticated 
catalogues of the genuine and canonical books in the two 
following centuries. In settling the canon we find from 
Eusebius, a.d. 315, that there were seven books concerning 
which the grounds of the doubts are fully given. He says, 
"In the first place are to be ranked the sacred four Gospels ; 
then the book of the Acts of the Apostles ; after that are to 
be reckoned the Epistles of Paul ; in the next place, that 
called the First Epistle of John, and the Epistle of Peter, are 
to be esteemed authentic. After this is to be placed the 
Revelation of John, about which we shall observe the dif- 
ferent opinions at proper seasons. Of the controverted, yet 
well known or approved by the most, are that called the 
Epistle of James, and that of Jude, and the second of Peter, 
and the second and third of John, whether written by the 
evangelist or by another of the same name." But concern- 
ing the last all doubts were gradually removed; and by the 
time of Jerome and Augustine, a.d. 342-420, many cata- 
logues are given, including our present books and none 
other. 

President Hopkins, in a very comprehensive yet brief 
manner, embodies a great amount of argument upon the 
integrity and authenticity of the books of the New Testa- 
ment ; and we shall from him make a few extracts. 

^' While, therefore, it appears that the writings of theN'ew 
Testament were some of them collected into a volume in the 
apostolical times, under the name of the Gospels and the 
Epistles; while the references to this volume during the 
second century are almost numberless; while no doubt ever 
arose respecting the mass of them, — still, the book which we 
now receive was not, in all its parts, formally agreed upon, 
in consequence of a careful examination of ancient testi- 
mony, until between three and four hundred years after the 
birth of Christ. It will be remembered, however, that if 



SACBED CANON. 481 

every part of the Xew Testament coiicerDiiig which there was 
then dispute were hlotted out, the argument for the truth of 
Christianity would not he in the least invalidated. There is, 
therefore, direct evidence, as perfect as the nature of the case 
admits, that those writings on which we depend for the truth 
of the Christian religion have existed, and were received 
without douht, from the very first. So full and unexception- 
able is the testimony thus given by the early writers, that it 
would seem, in the absence of anything to contradict it or to 
throw over it the slightest discredit, that further evidence 
could not be needed. Indeed, if we were to stop here we 
should have a body of evidence for the authenticity of these 
writings such as can be adduced in favor of no others of 
equal antiquity. The writings of Cicero are quoted by 
Quintilian, which shows that they were then extant and 
ascribed to him. But the writings of Cicero excited no con- 
troversy; they gave rise to no general opposition; they 
created no sects. Hence we have no means of knowing 
how these works were regarded by enennes or by rival 
parties .appealing to their authority. This, when it can be 
obtained, is the very highest kind of evidence ; and in 
respect to the Christian Scriptures it is most full and satis- 
factory. The heretical writers do indeed sometimes deny 
that the apostle or writer is an infallible authority ; but the}' 
never deny that the books were written by those to whom 
they were ascribed. Thus, the Cerinthians and the Ebionites, 
who sprang up while St. John was yet living, wished to 
retain the Mosaic law, and hence rejected the Epistles of 
Paul while they retained the Gospel of Matthew; and Mar- 
cion, A.D. 130, who rejected the Old Testament and was ex- 
communicated, though greatly incensed, and though he 
speaks disparagingly of several of the books, nowhere inti- 
mates that they were forgeries. 

" The same may be said of the ancient sects. We have, 
also, the indirect testimony of the enemies of Christianity, as 
Celsus, Porphyry, and Julian. Of these, Celsas flourished 
only about a hundred years after the Gospels were published, 

31 



482 INTEGRITY OF THE 

and was an acute and bitter adversary; and it seems quite 
impossible that any one of tbera, much more the whole, 
should have been forged and yet he not know or suspect it. 
He attacks the books ; he speaks of contradictions and diffi- 
culties in them ; but he hints no suspicion that they were 
forged. Indeed, he admits the writings, for he says, ' These 
things, then, we have alleged to you out of your own writ- 
ings, not needing any other weapons.' In Porphyry, born 
A.D. 233 (the most sensible and severe adversary of Christi- 
anity that antiquity can produce), we find no trace of any 
suspicion that the Christian writings were not authentic, 
though he pronounces the prophecy of Daniel a forger}-. 
Porphyry did not even deny the truth of the Gospel history. 
He admitted that the miracles were performed by Christ, 
but imputed them to magic, which he said he learned in 
Eg3^pt. Julian, commonly called the Apostate, flourished 
from A.D. 331 to 363. He quotes the four Gospels and the 
Acts, and nowhere gives any intimation that he suspected 
the whole or any part of them to be forgeries. 

"Another source of evidence is to be found in ancient ver- 
sions and manuscripts. The Syriac version was probably 
made early in the second century, and the first Latin version 
almost as early. Of course the New Testament must have 
existed, and been received as the standard of Christian truth, 
before these versions were made. Of ancient manuscripts 
containing the ~Eq\\ Testament or parts thereof, there are 
several thousands. About five hundred of the most im- 
portant have been collated with great care: many of them 
are of great antiquity. The Codex Yaticanus is believed, on 
very satisfactory evidence, to be of the fourth century, and the 
Codex Alexandrianus of the fifth, — perhaps both much earlier. 
Thus these manuscripts connect with manuscripts com- 
pared by Jerome and Eusebius, a.d. 315-420, who prepared 
critical editions of the ISTew Testament from manuscripts then 
ancient. The prodigious number of these manuscripts, the 
distant countries whence they were collected, and the identity 
of their contents with the quotations of the fathers of different 



SACRED CANON. 488 

ages, place the Xew Testament incomparably above all other 
ancient works in point of authenticity. 

"Is there, then, we are ready to ask, any kind of external' 
evidence conceivable which is wanting to our sacred books ? 
But, strong as is the external proof, it hardly equals that 
which is to be derived from the circumstances of the case, 
and from internal evidence. For if these writings are not 
authentic they must be forgeries ; and they are of such a 
character, and purport to have been written under such cir- 
cumstances, as to render a forgery of them impossible. Here, 
for example, are no fewer than nine letters which claim to 
have been written to numerous bodies of men and received 
of them ; and can any man believe that such letters, often 
containing severe reproof, could have been received and read, 
as we know these were by the early Christians, if they were 
forgeries ? Come, now, says Tertullian, born only sixty years 
after the death of St. John, ' Come, now, who wilt exercise 
thy curiosity more profitably in the business of thy salvation, 
run through the apostolical churches in which the very 
chairs of the apostles still preside, in which their authentic 
letters are recited, sounding forth the voice and representing 
the countenance of each.' 

" Can any man suppose that letters thus spoken of at that 
early age could be forged? Besides, when could they have 
been forged ? iS'ot, certainly, during the lives of the apostles, 
for then they would have confuted them ; and after their 
death it is morally impossible that such letters should have 
been received as from them by any body of Christians." 

We have not time to dwell longer upon the Xew Testa- 
ment ; and we now will briefly consider the Old. In the first 
place, Christ and the apostles indorsed the Jewish canon, as 
it then existed, as divine Scripture; and this canon was the 
same as our Old Testament. 

''I was daily with you," says Christ to those who came to 
apprehend him, "in the temple, teaching, and ye took me 
not; but the Scripture must be fulfilled." "Think not that I 
am come to destroy the law, or the prophets ; I am not come to 



484 INTEGRITY OF THE 

destroy, but to fulfill." " These are the words which I spake 
unto you while I was yet with you, that all things must be 
fulfilled which were written in the lavj of Hoses, and in the 
2?rophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me." ''AH Scripture 
is given by inspiration of God," says Paul. Thus, in the 
'New Testament, the apostles indorse all the Scriptures in 
current use among the Jews. The Old Testament is con- 
stantly appealed to as the loord of God. "While, also, the 
Jewish Scriptures are constantly quoted, there is no intima- 
tion that they are in any part what they should not be. The 
common allusions to them show the esteem in which they 
are held; as, " Thus saith the Scriptures;" ''Thus saith the 
Lord;" " As the Holy Ghost saith;" " As it is written." Is, 
then, the Jewish canon the same as our Old Testament? 
Consider the testimony of the Kew Testament. In the New 
Testament nearly all the books of the Old are alluded to or 
quoted. Then, again, we have the testimony of Jewish 
writers, especially of Josephus, born about a.d. 37, a few 
years after the death of Christ. In his treatise defending the 
authenticity and credibility of the Jewish Scriptures, he 
says : " For we have not among us myriads of books, dis- 
cordant and conflicting, but only twenty-two books, contain- 
ing the history of all past time, and justly believed to be 
divine. Of these, five belong to Moses, which contain the 
laws, and the traditions of the origin of mankind until his 
death. This period is little less than three thousand years. 
From the death of Moses to the reign of Artaxerxes, king 
of the Persians after Xerxes, the prophets who came after 
Moses recorded the events of their times in thirteen books. 
The four remaining books contain hymns to God and rules 
of life for man. From Artaxerxes to our own time, every- 
thing has been written ; but it is not esteemed of equal credit 
with what preceded, because there has not been an exact 
succession of prophets. And it is evident from fact how 
we believe in our Scriptures ; for through so long a period 
already elapsed, no one has dared to add anything, or take 
from them, or to make alterations; but it is implanted in all 



SACRED CANON. 485 

Jews, from their very birth, to consider them oracles of God 
{Szot doyfiaraj^ and to abide by them, and for them, if need be, 
cheerfully to die." The testimony also of the early Christian 
fathers conclusively shows that the Jewish canon, as indorsed 
by Christ and the apostles, was precisely the same as that of 
our Old Testament. Consider, also, the great fact that from 
the time of Christ to the present day Christians as well as 
Jews have held in equal veneration the Old Testament. In 
respect to the preservation of the text of the Old and Xew 
Testaments, we cannot do better than quote the language of 
Professor Sampson, of Virginia : 

" I return, then, to the affirmation that of no books so 
ancient has the text been so certainly and so well preserved 
as that of the books which compose our Old and i^ew Testa- 
ments. There are, indeed, here and there passages, and still 
oftener clauses, the integrity of which there may be some good 
reason to suspect ; and there are hundreds and thousands of 
minor variations brought to light by a careful comparison of 
manuscripts, versions, and quotations. But of these the 
great majority do not affect the sense in the least, and could 
not, therefore, be expressed in a good translation ; and 
where they do, either a judicious criticism can determine the 
true reading, or it is unimportant to the Christian system, 
and generally to the passage itself, which of several readings, 
that may be about equally sustained, shall be adopted as 
original. The very means of multiplying the various read- 
ings, viz. the great number of documents to be compared, 
have always furnished so many effectual guards to prevent 
corruption of the text, and furnish now ample means of cor- 
recting it, where correction is needed. It is precisely those 
books, classic as well as sacred, of which we have fewest 
manuscripts and other documents, and, consequently, com- 
paratively few various readings, that the text is most liable 
to suspicion. On the other hand, the text of those is most 
certain for which we have the greatest number of documents, 
especially manuscripts, to compare, and, consequently, the 
greatest number of various readings actually occurring. 



486 INTEGRITY OF THE SACRED CANON, 

Thus has Providence by natural means, and without a 
miracle, preserved the text of all the Sacred Scriptures ; and 
it is vain for skepticism longer to hope to find a cover for its 
unbelief under the tlims}^ pretext of its corruption, — either 
accidental or designed. The worst text that could be pub- 
lished on the authority of any manuscripts would not alter 
a single phase of Christianity." 

Can we, then, question the integrity of the sacred canon, 
or the truth of the words of inspiration, " I, Jesus, have 
sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the 
churches" ? 



CHAPTEE XYIII. 

THE PLEXARY IXSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE. 

Whex, in addition to prophecies and miracles, we have in 
the Scriptures a most wonderful adaptation to our wants; 
when we see in thom the exhibition of truths far more clear 
than the light of nature can make known, and the revelation 
of new and most important truths that no uninspired mind 
could discover ; when, looking at the character of Christ, we 
see a perfect model of all virtue, as well as the only possible 
medium of salvation for sinners, and then consider the suc- 
cess of Christianity under circumstances that would crush it, 
if not divine, the conclusion is irresistible that the whole 
system of religion in the Scriptures of the Old and l^ew Tes- 
tament is of God, and not of human origin. 

The inspiration of the Bible does not rest upon the fact 
alone of the assertion of the sacred writers to their inspira- 
tion. "While this assertion is an additional argument to prove 
the Bible from God, it yet forms but one link of a mighty 
chain that binds the whole together. Until the other evidences 
have been disproved, there is not the shadow of a reason for 
the assertion that the Bible is not of God. With the exist- 
ence of the great facts of the adaptation of the Bible, mira- 
cles, prophecies, the divine excellence of Christ's character, 
and the success of Christianity, the authority of the Bible, as 
revealing a system of religion from God, rests upon an im- 
movable foundation : that authority is infallible, and therefore 
not of human origin. 

But the general inspiration of the Bible is not to be 
confounded with the plenary inspiration of the Bible. The 
former has already been shown. If nothing more was done, 
this would be enough to authorize us to receive the Bible as 



488 THE PLENARY INSPIRATION 

the word of God, and to submit to the Christiiin religion 
with all its truths as alike infallible and divine. With the 
general inspiration of the Bible it is perfectly consistent that 
there may exist some errors of history or science, some mis- 
takes of dates or persons or representations of physical phe- 
nomena, or even some deficiencies of moral truths. We do 
not think these things actually to exist in the Bible ; but sup- 
pose they do? Suppose, for reasons best known to God, he 
should permit a record defective in some respects to be given 
to man : does that prove the whole defective? Are miracles, 
prophecies, the adaptation of the Bible to our wants, the di- 
vine virtues of Christ, and the success of Christianity, all to 
count for nothing because of such deficiencies ? Must we 
throw away the Bible because of some imperfections ? Must 
we disown in the main the divine authorit}^ of the Scriptures 
because it does not extend to every chapter and verse? Here 
infidelitj^ upon its own ground, may be shown to be baseless 
and unworthy of confidence. Even should we go so far as to 
admit that a very large part of the Bible was not inspired, 
this would not prove the whole Bible uninspired. If the ob- 
jections of infidelity were conceded as to many things recorded 
as facts, 3-et this would not do away with the evidence of 
miracles and prophecy; this would not subvert the proof of 
the divine mission of Christ ; this would not do away with 
the adaptation of the Bible to our wants We assert that, 
taking the lowest ground, admitting even a thousand mis- 
takes, and confessing to great error upon much that is of im- 
portance to believe in the Scriptures, enough would still 
remain to prove that the Bible in all essential respects is of 
God, and bears the impress of a higher than human authority, 
God has not placed his word upon such precarious ground 
that it will be subverted, or proved not divine, unless every- 
thing claimed for it is established. ^N'ot one angel, but a 
thousand, guard its divine authority; and before that author- 
ity can be destroyed it is necessary that the whole angelic 
band that stand sentinel over their sacred trust should be dis- 
armed. We believe that no idea is more fallacious than the 
assertion that one, or two, or twenty, or a hundred errors in 



OF THE BIBLE. 489 

the Holj Scriptures would conclusively show that the Bible 
was not divine and that God had nothing to do with its com- 
position. These errors would, indeed, be clear objections to 
the divine authority of those parts of the Bible where thej^ 
existed ; for God is the author only of truth; but they could 
not form a valid argument for the rejection of the whole Bible 
as from God, and for the assertion that it had but one ele- 
ment, even the human, and therefore must stand upon the 
same ground as all other works. Consequently, we say that, 
under the most unfavorable admissions, even upon the very 
low ground that some delight to stand upon, it cannot be 
shown that the Bible has not general inspiration, that Chris- 
tianity as a system is not divine, that the Old and ISTew Tes- 
taments do not, in their essential features, bear the impress 
of God, and that there is not a high sense in which the Bible 
differs from all other books, giving to it a supreme authority 
that would not be applicable to any human production. 

We claim for the Bible a general inspiration, if nothing 
more. We say that even if that inspiration was made in a high 
degree defective, yet the Bible would stand upon a foundation 
altogether different from all other books ; that enough would 
still remain in it to make the Holy Scriptures worthy of the 
highest respect and deserving the most considerate attention 
and love. So long as the grand central truth stands out, of 
Christ, the Messiah, sent by God, — so long as any one undis- 
puted miracle of his can be proved, or a single prediction 
that carries with it the impress of a divine mind, — then, upon 
the simple authority of but one miracle and but one predic- 
tion, we claim for the Bible enough of inspiration to make it 
worthy of confidence, when upon the side of this miracle 
and prophecy there is the conclusive test of adaptation and 
appTOjmateness to our wants as sinners. But, in claiming at 
least for the Bible a general inspiration, we would be under- 
stood clearly to deny that there is any necessity for taking 
the low ground supposed, or that general inspiration does not 
comprehend vastly more than this. Our object is only to 
show that there is no reason in the argument that one or 
many errors, even if established, would prove the Bible not 



490 THE^ PLENA R Y INSPIRA TIO N 

from God. These errors would be defects, but uot reasous 
for an absolute rejection of the Bible. We might wish the 
Bible free from them, but their existence would not show that 
no parts of the Bible were from God. It must ever be remem- 
bered that objections against the Bible must be proved before 
they can have any weight, and that those who would under- 
mine its divine authority must have something better than 
assertion. When the general inspiration of the Scriptures 
is shown, be it of a high or low character, enough will always 
remain to show the divinity of its origin; and this, con- 
sidered simply as a fact established, must ever bring with it 
the deepest claim upon our homage and respect. 

But we enter now upon the subject of the iilenarij inspiration 
of the Bible. This is a step higher than the general inspiration 
of the Old and Xew Testaments. Plenary inspiration includes 
all that general inspiration does; it diiiers only in that it is a 
more perfect kind of inspiration. The Bible is generally in- 
spired if it shows conclusively the divine authority of the 
Christian religion, and all the essential facts relating to that 
religion. It is generally inspired if the writers of the Bible 
were under such an influence of the Holy Spirit as to enable 
them to communicate the great facts of the Bible as infallible 
truths, with the sanction of God as to their reality and their 
binding obligation. Inspiration rests not so much upon the 
truth of the Bible, — other books are as true, — as upon the 
fact that those books proceed from God, are enforced by his 
authority, and are required to be believed in by divine sanc- 
tions. The plenary inspiration of the Bible comprises all 
this; but its peculiar distinction from general inspiration 
consists in the fact that plenary inspiration has allusion to 
the mind especially of the writer. Plenary inspiration has 
reference to the precise language of the writing itself. As 
language is made up of words, and the best mode of inspira- 
tion must be the expression in the original manuscripts of the 
exact words of the Holy Spirit, consequently the Holy Scrip- 
tures, if pleuarily inspired, must embody the selection of the 
best kind of language to accomplish the precise end of every 
book in the word of God. But what is the best kind of Ian- 



OF THE BIBLE. 491 

guage to commuDicate the mind of God to man, unless it be 
language embodying the very words of the Holy Spirit? 
This is in no respect inconsistent with the great idea that the 
Bible has in it largely a human element as well as a divine 
element. The Bible was made for man ; it must, therefore, 
have in it the human as well as the divine, and both elements 
blended together. The divine element must exist to show 
its infallible authority ; the human element, to adapt it to the 
endless conditions of human wants. "Without the one, it 
would not be from God ; without the other, it might do for 
angels, but not for mankind. iSTow, whenever the plenary 
inspiration of the Bible is spoken of, we would be under- 
stood to mean simply that the minds of the writers of the 
Bible were under such guidance or influence of the Holy 
Spirit as to give in human language, in a way the most ap- 
propriate under the circumstances, the mind of God, his 
thoughts or will. Thus, while the human element is made 
use of, it is under such control as to secure also the divine 
element. The human element, in all its numberless modes 
of expression, is employed, while the divine element, as a 
-restraining and regulating power, exists to give those sanc- 
tions that should exalt the Bible above all other books. Now, 
to speak of the plenary inspiration of the Bible, with the 
mind alone of the writers inspired in different degrees, and 
yet no direct superintendence in respect to their choice of 
language, — no such inspiration as to lead in all cases to the 
selection of the best words, words the most appropriate, 
concise, and adapted to the ideas that are communicated, — 
is in no respect to come up to the full meaning of plenary 
inspiration. 

It is evident that the best kind of inspiration must have 
relation not onl}^ to the substance of truth, but also to its mode. 
There must be some regard to the dress of truth, as well as to 
the body of it. Ideas, to have their most appropriate mean- 
ing, must be embodied in appropriate words. Language must 
lose much of its power unless there is due regard to suitable 
expression. This is what we claim for plenary inspiration. It 
is simply divine truth clothed in suitable words, and in that 



492 THE PLENARY INSPIRATION 

very language most appropriate to convey the mind of God. 
By plenary inspiration of the Bible it is not meant that 
no verbal inaccuracies may not have crept into the transla- 
tions of the Bible from the original copy : we do not hold 
that the translators of tlie Bible were inspired, because that 
is not necessary in a translation; a heathen as well as a 
Christian may translate from one language to another; but 
what is meant is that the very language of the original 
manuscripts of the Bible, as much as the thoughts of the 
writers, was under the direct superintendence of the Holy 
Spirit, so that the writers of the Bible were truly the aman- 
uenses of the Holy Spirit, presenting his thoughts with the 
best selection of words. But should it be said that this 
would exclude the human element and leave only the divine, 
in reply we say, this does not follow if the Holy Spirit 
makes use of the idiosyncrasy of the different writers of the 
Bible, and permits each to express himself after his own 
peculiar constitution and in accordance wnth the varying con- 
ditions of the human mind. The essential thino^is to avoid 
error, and express truth in the best manner ; this may in 
the wisest manner be attained by leaving each writer to 
speak in his own way, and in harmony with the nature 
God has given him, and the circumstances in which he is 
placed. 

Our idea of plenary inspiration is simply that God com- 
municates his mind in the best way for mankind. ISTow, the 
question is. Does plenary inspiration discard the human ele- 
ment? Not at all. It makes use of it intimately blended or 
pervaded by the divine element. Thus, the human element 
is that which makes a revelation adapted to man in sympath}^ 
with man, — something permitted to man in accordance with 
the endless diversities of his condition in this world ; while the 
divine element preserves from error, and gives the sanction of 
God to the truth. We hold that all this is perfectly consistent 
with plenary inspiration. It is not that God speaks alone, or 
that man speaks alone, but that God, through his all-per- 
vading and controlling Spirit, makes use of the idiosyncrasy oi 
each writer, while he preserves that idiosyncrasy from error, 



OF THE BIBLE. 493 

and leads it to the expression of such ideas in such a way 
as best to secure the end of a suitable revelation of his will 
and thoughts to man. God gives a Bible not to angels, but 
to mankind ; and therefore all his communications to men 
must be in accordance with their peculiar wants and circum- 
stances. Thus the human element and the divine are made 
to blend together in this respect, that God condescends to 
the limited capacities of man in such a way as to communicate 
his mind as best it may be understood within the sphere of the 
human, while the human is so guided as to be kept from error, 
and so enlightened as to declare such truths as most truly 
will secure the great end of human redemption. How, then, 
is plenary inspiration inconsistent with the fullest admission 
of the human element in the Bible ? There is no more diffi- 
culty in God's consulting the mode of truth than in his con- 
sulting the substance of truth, and no more inappropriate- 
ness in his prescribing the manner of revelation than in his 
prescribing the essences. Rather we should infer that God 
would have respect not only to his word, but to the way 
of its communication; and this is just what we mean by 
plenary inspiration. "Will, then, any one say that because 
God makes use of the peculiar idiosyncrasy of each writer 
of the Bible, the Bible is therefore not plenarily inspired ? 
We do not see how both the human and the divine elements 
combine; but do we not see the fact itself? Do we not see 
that God speaks to us not in angelic but in human language, 
and therefore must accommodate himself to the essential 
limitation and even imperfection of human language ? God 
comes with just as much truth in the dilferent conditions of 
our earthly existence as we can most suitably comprehend, 
and at the same time with just that truth which most wisely 
in all ages will secure the great end of human redemption. 
We think a singular want of consideration has been shown 
in accounting for this peculiarity of the revelation of God's 
mind to man. That which is the highest excellence of 
the Bible is interpreted into the denial of its plenary inspi- 
ration ; and because the human element is admitted we are 
told that the divine element is either unnecessary or impossi- 



494 THE PLENARY INSPIRATION 

ble. But how does this follow? The divine element. i8 in- 
dispensable to keep from error, and equally essential to se- 
cure the best mode of presenting truth. Why may not both 
be made use of in perfect consistenc}' Avith the proper devel- 
opment of the human element ? We think the most dan- 
gerous heresy of the present day in relation to inspiration 
is found in the assertion that if God speaks man cannot 
speak, and if man speaks God cannot speak, — in other words, 
the denial of the blending of the human and the divine ele- 
ments in inspiration. It is this very union of both that makes 
the Bible the noblest, the best and most useful of all books, 
and gives to it in all conditions of life the authority of God. 

There are three forms of error into which the mind falls 
in relation to the inspiration of the Bible, — those of infidelity, 
of pantheism, and of superstition. Infidelity denies the divine 
element in the Bible altogether; pantheism makes all in the 
Bible an emanation from God alone, in common with every- 
thing else; while superstition misapplies the human and the 
divine in the Holy Scriptures, so as to degrade both. The 
infidel sees no God in the Bible ; the pantheist sees no man ; 
while the superstitious sees neither God nor man, in the sense 
in which both are delineated in the Sacred Scriptures. 

After the general inspiration of the Bible is shown, but 
two things are needful to be established in order to show the 
plenary or the best possible kind of inspiration. IvTo person 
can doubt that if there runs through the Bible a great chain 
of prophecy, — if there are scattered all over the Sacred 
Scriptures predictions fulfilled and unfulfilled, — then the 
writers of the Bible must be under a general inspiration of 
God ; for they certainly could not foretell, hundreds of years 
before accomplishment, events to take place Prophecy of 
itself shows inspiration ; and now if, in connection with this, 
a most wonderful adaptation to human wants is seen in the 
Bible, and truths are declared which were never known 
before, or which were universally forgotten or perverted if 
ever known, then the reason is more conclusive still for 
concluding that the Scriptures are generally inspired. What 
man cannot do must, if done, be accomplished by God; 



OF THE BIBLE. 495 

and we have onl}- to notice in the Bible that which man can- 
not do, thrown alone upon his own resources, to find an irre- 
sistible argument for the general inspiration of the Bible. 
This general inspiration is not destroyed because of errors dis- 
covered in history, or science, or even ethical statements. It 
is not destroyed if much can be shown in the Bible that is use- 
less, or inappropriate, or inconsistent with other portions of the 
Scriptures; for, remember, miracles, prophecy, adaptation, 
success of Christianity in the first centur}', and the perfect 
character of Christ, must each and all be shown false before 
with clear argument a person can say that in no sense is the 
Bible inspired or the work of God. What a hopeless task has 
the infidel, then, before him !' This fivefold rope of strength 
ties the Bible together. iN'ot one strand, but all, must be cut 
before any valid excuse can be given for the rejection of the 
Scriptures. How preposterous, then, the conduct of those 
who think, feel, and act as if the Bible was proved to be only 
of human origin, because they believe some objection has 
been sustained against the Scriptures ! They might as well 
deny the existence of the sun because •of some spots on its 
surface, or that of the moon because it is partially obscured 
by the clouds. 

We do not hesitate to sa}- that the general inspiration of 
the Bible rests upon a foundation of granite as firm as the 
everlasting hills, — a foundation even more strong and endur- 
ing, since the earth itself shall pass away. Infidelity, then, 
under the most favorable admissions, can accomplish nothing 
against it ; and, consequently, there is an all-sufiicient ground 
for loving and receiving the Bible as the word of God, if it 
is only generally inspired. The diamonds and pearls in an 
earthen vessel are none the less diamonds and pearls because 
of the rubbish that may be mixed up with them; and, if it 
would be insanity to reject the treasures because of the rub- 
bish, has infidelity anything to boast of because it thinks it 
can show valid objections or errors in the Bible ? 

We are convinced that not only the general inspiration of 
the Bible can be shown, but that we can even take a higher 
step, and prove it plenary inspiration, in the true sense of 
this language. 



496 THE PLENARY INSPIRATION 

What, then, is necessary to prove the plenary inspiration 
of the Bible ? After the general inspiration of the Scrip- 
tures is shown, but two things are needful to be established, 
to show the plenary or best kind of inspiration. 

1st. That no errors in history, science, or ethical truths 
exist in the Bible. 

2d. That the inspiration of all the Scriptures be asserted in 
the Bible in such a manner as to show their plenary inspira- 
tion. 

The first proposition has nothing to do with variations of 
language, or those slight discrepancies of words that arise 
from different copies. The Bible does not attempt to father 
the mistakes of copyists or the different interpretations of its 
readers. If, according to the well-established laws of popular 
language, no error can be shown in the Bible, then it is 
conclusively proved to be free from all scientific, historical, or 
ethical untruths. What erroneous statement is there in the 
Bible? If one can be shown, then, so far as that statement is 
concerned, the Bible in that portion is not inspired, for the 
Holy Ghost is not the author of error, but of truth ; but even 
this admitted, and the general inspiration of the Scriptures is 
not touched. But it can with confidence be said that no 
such statement can be shown. The skeptic cannot ]siy his hand 
upon a single error in the word of God. Often has it been 
tried, and as often has it been found that the mistake ex- 
isted in the mind of the objector, and not in the Holy Scrip- 
tures. 

The more careful the investigations into the field of science, 
and the more clear the classification of the facts of history, 
the deeper has been found the harmony of science and pro- 
fane history with the Bible. While the Bible comes to 
us with the main object of teaching moral truth, it has 
never asserted a single thing inconsistent with any truth 
made known in science or with any fact of history. That 
the Bible does not profess to give us a treatise upon geology, 
or astronomy, or chemistry, so far from being a blemish, 
is a great excellence. It has higher objects to accomplish 
than to waste time upon subjects that are connected only 



OF TEE BIBLE. 497 

with the intellect and of no immediate use to advance the 
end of revelation. 

Consider the second proposition. Is the plenary nispira- 
tion of the Bible asserted in the word of God ? 

Plenary inspiration has already been defined to be such a 
superintendence of the Holy Spirit as to reach to the lan- 
guage of the writers of the Bible, and consequently as includ- 
ing the choice of the most appropriate words that embody in 
the best phraseology the natural characteristics of the writer. 
What constitutes plenary inspiration is far more the condition 
of the writing than of the writer. The mind of the writer may 
be in different states under the influence of the Holy Spirit, 
or that mind may be left to write many things in the natural 
state, under no particular excitement of the Holy Spirit. 
What constitutes plenary inspiration is simply that the 
thoughts and language of the writer should be pre- 
cisely such as the Holy Spirit would compose if left to write 
the Bible without the aid of human instrumentality. The 
confusion that rests upon this subject is cleared away if we 
distinguish between the Scriptures and the human instru- 
mentality that composed them. Plenary inspiration has 
reference to the Scriptures themselves, rather than to the 
writers of them. The end to be secured was the composing 
of certain events in history and certain great moral truths in 
such a variety as to be adapted to every class of mind and ever}' 
human want. To accomplish that end, human instruments 
were made use of; as to the mode of the divine influence upon 
the mind, this is a matter that it does not concern us to inves- 
tigate. The inspiration was such as to be adequate for the task 
to be performed ; and that task was the composing of truths 
without error, facts without needless redundance, events with 
conciseness, and all things suitable to know best adapted for 
the age in which they were written, and for subsequent ages, 
under the direct supervision of the Holy Spirit, so that no 
human imperfections should mar the writings or human mis- 
take destroy their divine authority in any respect. But the 
same infinite wisdom that made use of men, and not angels, 
to compose the Scriptures, to secure their highest adap- 

32 



498 THE PLENABY INSPIRATION 

tation, selected difierent writers in different ages, who should 
embody in writing enough of the peculiarities of the age in 
which they lived to mark the period when they were written, 
and at the same time enough of the peculiarities of the 
writers not to weaken the evidence of their individuality. 

The differences of style, the singular diversity of expression, 
so often objected to the plenary inspiration of the Bible, is 
the highest evidence of that inspiration. This diversity of 
style, these numerous writers, with all their peculiarities of 
thought and expression, give an individualit}- to the Bible 
infinitely superior to one dead level of style and expression. 
The Holy Spirit made use of such a variety of instruments 
to make their w^ritings adapted to the diversities of every 
age, the peculiarities of every land, and every condition of 
life. Thus, as the divinity of Christ became incarnated in 
his humanity to give a more perfect illustration of virtue 
and secure the redemption of man, so the mind of God may 
be said to be incarnated in the Holy Scriptures through the 
use of human instrumentality in their composition, and the 
embodying, in perfect consistency with divine truth, all the 
endless diversities of human thought and feeling and action. 
And yet one of the highest internal evidences of inspiration 
is made use of by many to disprove altogether the plenary 
inspiration of the Bible ; as if God, who condescended so 
much to human wants as to suffer his Son to assume hu- 
manity and die upon the cross, could not make use of all the 
diversity of human instrumentality without destroying the 
divine authority of his word. It is sometimes said that the 
plenary inspiration of the Bible is unnecessary, provided the 
mind was inspired in respect to the thoughts, and that the 
writers of the Scriptures were left alone to their own judg- 
ment and fidelity. But an inspiration that had no reference 
to the manner, the peculiar selection of the right language 
or words, would not be sufl5cient to guard against all redun- 
dancy, all improprieties of expression, and all mistakes. With- 
out such an inspiration as directly to affect the language or 
secure the right selection of words, essential error might be 
communicated, and mistakes be made, through the too great 



OF THE BIBLE. 499 

liberty of the writers. How without a plenary inspiration 
could such an inimitable conciseness be manifested as is seen 
in the Bible, embodying such an immense variety of truths, 
through so many centuries, in a space so small ? How could 
there be a perfect assurance that all the Bible is the word of 
God, or that man is not by his own authority speaking to us 
rather than God himself, and therefore we must pronounce 
an opinion from a human rather than a divine source ? Con- 
sider directly the evidence of the Scriptures upon this sub- 
ject. When Christ, in Luke, speaks of the persecutions the 
apostles should experience after his death, he declares to 
them, " For I will give you a mouth and a wisdom which all 
your adversaries shall not be able to gainsay or resist." In 
John he declares, " The Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, 
whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you 
all things, and bring all things to your remembrance what- 
soever I have said unto you." The claim to inspiration is 
clearly made by the apostles in those passages where they 
place their own writings upon the same footing with the 
books of the Old Testament. For- St. Paul, speaking of the 
Holy Scriptures, — a common expression among the Jews, — in 
which Timothy had been instructed from his childhood, says, 
*' All Scripture is given by inspiration of God;" thus includ- 
ing the Old and ]^ew Testaments. St. Peter, speaking of the 
ancient prophets, says, " The Spirit of Christ was in them," 
and " The prophecy came not in old time by the will of man ; 
but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy 
Ghost." The quotations of our Lord and his apostles from 
the books of the Old Testament are often introduced with 
the expression in which their inspiration is directly asserted. 
" Thus spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias;" "By the mouth of 
thy servant David thou hast said." And St. Peter charges the 
Christians, " Be mindful of the words which were spoken be- 
fore by the holy prophets, and of the commandments of us the 
apostles." In the book of Eevelation we read of the per- 
sonal inspiration of John in the words, " Jesus sent and 
signified by his angel to his servant John the things that 
were to come to pass." Paul to the Corinthians thus ex- 



500 THE PLENABY INSPIRATION 

presses himself: " Which things we speak not in the words 
which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost 
teacheth." Storr and Flatt give the following interpretation 
to this text: ^' Paul," the}^ say, "asserts that the doctrines 
of Christianity were revealed to him by the almighty agency 
of God himself; and, finally, that the inspiration of the Di- 
vine Spirit extended even to his words, and to all his ex- 
hibitions of revealed trnths." They add that "St. Paul 
clearly distinguishes between the doctrine itself and the 
manner in which it is communicated." St. Peter tells us 
that he wrote all his letters not only with the words which 
the Holy Ghost teacheth, but also, as were the other scri'ptures 
(of the Old Testament), according to the wisdom given unto 
him. All the Scriptures are also indiscriminately called 
the word of God; not only is the entire Bible called the 
icord of God, but without distinction it is called the oracles 
of God. AYhat word more expressive to show a complete 
inspiration, extending even to the words, than the lan- 
guage, oracles of God? Christ, speaking of the Old Testa- 
ment, says, " All things which are written concerning me in 
Moses, the prophets, and the Psalms, must be fulfilled." It 
is worthy of remark that Jesus Christ and the apostles 
habitually applied the title of proj)hets to all the aidhors of the 
Old Testament. Their habitual designation of the entire 
Scriptures was, "Moses and the prophets." David says, 
" The Spirit of the Lord has spoken by me.'" "And his word 
was upon my tongue.'^ Says Christ to the Jews, "Is it not 
written m yoiirlawV' thus afiirming the divine authority of 
their Scriptures ; thus agreeing with the testimony of Zacha- 
rias, in Luke, " It is God who hath spoken by the mouth of 
his holy prophets, which have been since the world began." 
It was twenty or thirty years after the Pentecost that Peter 
was pleased to quote " All the epistles of Paul, his well- 
beloved brother," and that he spoke of them as " sacred 
writings," which already in his day made part of the holy 
letters and were to be classed with the rest of the Scriptures. 
He assigns to them the same rank, and he declares that 
ignorant men could not pervert them but to their, own 



OF THE BIBLE. 501 

destruction, ^"^e quote this important passage : " Even as 
our beloved brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given 
unto him, hath written unto you ; as also in all his epistles, 
speaking in them of these things ; in which are some things 
hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and 
unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto 
their own destruction." 

Many other passages might be given to show the plenary 
inspiration of the Bible, an inspiration so perfect as to extend 
to the words written. Such an inspiration is also confirmed 
by the reason that often the prophets themselves did not 
understand the full import of what they wrote, and conse- 
quently must have been directed in their very language. 
With such an inspiration the conduct of the Jews in respect 
to their Scriptures, and the sentiments of the Christian 
Church in the first century and in later times, concur. If 
such an amount of evidence does not establish the plenary 
inspiratioi; of the Scriptures, we are at a loss to conceive 
what argument can do it. 

Plenary inspiration has, especially, relation to the original 
manuscripts from which the Bible has been copied. iN'or does 
it attempt any nice subdivision, or lay down any rules by which 
in one chapter we may detect the inspiration of suggestion, 
in another that of elevation, and in another that of superin- 
tendence. Great confusion has arisen from confounding the 
book itself with the mind of the writer. But plenary inspi- 
ration does not so much contemplate the mind of the writer as 
that which is written; its purpose is consummated if what is 
written is such as God himself would write were human instru- 
mentality discarded. Consequently, the mind of the writer 
may be in an endless variety of states, and yet, with the 
widest diversity of feeling and thought, there maybe plenary 
inspiration, ^or does the true idea of this inspiration 
admit that one part of the Bible is any less or any more in- 
spired than another, or that in one place there is an inspira- 
tion of a high kind and in another of an inferior kind. 
Either the Bible is plenarily inspired, or it is not : if it is, then 
one part of the Bible is as trul}^ the word of God as another 



502 THE PLENABY INSPIRATION 

p^rt ; if it is not, then those parts of the Bible which are unin- 
spired are not of divine authority. If the general inspiration 
of the Bible is admitted, then it becomes those who deny its 
plenary inspiration to show clearly what parts are not inspired. 
It is not enough to admit in vague language that the Bible is 
the word of God ; it must be shown what part is not the word 
of God. It is not enough to contend for diverse kinds of in- 
spiration ; the line should be clearly drawn where the inspi- 
ration of superintendency becomes that of elevation, or the 
inspiration of elevation becomes that of suggestion. If the 
Bible makes no such distinctions, it is not necessary that we 
should. The difficnlty lies in misapprehending what is meant 
by the plenary inspiration of the Bible. Let us suppose that a 
man who wishes to communicate certain important facts in 
respect to his fomily, and with those facts certain moral in- 
structions, to a friend in a distant land, employs his son as an 
amanuensis to write to that friend. !N'ow, some things the sou 
may know without any direct instruction from the father; 
some things he may not know, and may need direct instruc- 
tion ; some things he may partially know, and in those respects 
in which he is ignorant he may need to be set right. The 
son writes the letter, and the father indorses it, after reading 
it over, with his name. That letter is truly the father's letter ; 
it communicates his mind, it expresses his thoughts, — it may 
be all the better for embodying the peculiarities of the son's 
mind. What more reasonable than that God should in like 
manner, in his letters to his children, make use of the diverse 
individuality of the writers of the Holy Scriptures and em- 
body the endless diversities of thought peculiar to each writer? 
Why doubt the plenary inspiration of the Scriptures because 
a free use is made of the peculiarities of every mind and age ? 
Were truths communicated by every writer in the same 
manner, we should suspect collusion or mutual connivance. 
But the very diversity of style by each writer obviating alto- 
gether this difficulty, is often spoken of in such a way as to 
disparage their plenary inspiration. Great confusion will 
arise in the mind unless the writing and the writer are 
not always kept distinct in the consideration of the sub- 



OF TEE BIBLE. 503 

ject of plenary inspiration. Upon the clay of Pentecost 
many spoke with new tongues, and in a high sense may, in 
their thoughts and feelings, have been under the influence of 
the Holy Spirit; but Peter and the apostles alone were au- 
thorized to write with an authority as great for their Epis- 
tles as for the very words that issued from them upon 
that memorable occasion. The Apostle Paul, for example, 
had not "received the gospel from man, but by revelation 
of Jesus Christ." He wrote "alibis letters," as St. Peter 
tells us, " not only with the words which the Holy Ghost 
teacheth, but also as were the other scriptures [of the Old 
Testament], according to the wisdom given unto him." 

It will, then, be seen that what may have been the peculiar 
state of the mind of the writers of the Bible, what may have 
been the diversity of the influences of the Holy Spirit upon 
each writer, are inquiries that do not enter into the subject 
of plenary inspiration. From the nature of the case, these in- 
quiries are too intricate and involved to afford any good 
ground to stand upon. We do not know but that the mode 
of the Spirit's influence changed with every writer, or that 
the same writer was under difterent influences of a high or 
a low degree at difterent times ; but, as in the illustration of 
the son who was the amanuensis of his father in writing to a 
friend in a distant land, it was seen that the authority- of the 
father was not aftected by his accommodation to the peculi- 
arities of the mind of the son, or by his permission to write 
things known equally as well by the son as by the father, so 
also in the word of God an accommodation to the mind of 
the writer, or a permission to write things that did not need 
a direct revelation, in no respect invalidates the divine au- 
thority of the writing. All that is necessarj^ to know is the 
simple fact. Are the writings of the Old and the Xew Testa- 
ments, indiscriminately called the word of God, acknowledged 
without limitation to be inspired, and treated as such, by the 
Jews and the early Christians ? 

We have already shown the frequent and direct asser- 
tion by the sacred writers of their inspiration. It has been 
seen that they acknowledged no graduated scale of high or 



5a4 THE PLENARY IMSFIBATJON 

low inspiration, or confessed to one part of the Bible as of 
greater authority than another. These reiined distinctions 
are the work of a later day. They are not even intimated 
in the Bible. The Gospels are not extolled more than the 
Epistles, or the !N'ew Testament praised at the expense of the 
Old. Christ himself asserts that he came not to destroy the law 
or the prophets, but to establish them ; he came as a living 
illustration of the divine truth of the Old Testament, not to 
supersede it as good only for a barbarous age, but through 
all coming time to give the impress by every prophetic fulfill- 
ment of the divinity of its origin. Ko reasoning is so desti- 
tute of proof as that which infers that because the coming of 
Christ was the superseding of the ceremonial law, therefore 
it was the superseding of the Old Testament. But nothing 
can supersede or dispense with an inspired book: if it comes 
from God, its authority is divine, were its age millions of 
years. The ceremonial law, with the Levitical rites, as 
adapted for one age and one nation alone, like the Ark of 
the Covenant or the sacred temple, has passed away, and 
the express mission, example, and precepts of Christ have 
dispensed with their observance. 

But what has that to do with the fact of the inspiration of 
the Old Testament, or the binding authority of that, even as 
of the jSTew, with the single exception of the ceremonial and 
Levitical law and rites, alone instituted for a particular age 
of the world and one nation ? 

One of the greatest mistakes in respect to a divine revela- 
tion is the losing sight of its progressive nature. The Bible 
is not stereotyped for one age ; it is a book for all ages. Con- 
sequently, it must at the same time be local and universal, 
must have a specific adaptation to certain periods of the world 
and a general adaptation to all periods and all nations. Why 
overlook a feature so essential for a genuine inspiration, and 
make that very fact which is a high argument for its divine 
authority an excuse for the disparaging of its claims ? Were 
the Bible adapted only for the present age of the world, 
we should see indeed nothing in it antiquated or old-fash- 
ioned, nothing but an exclusive fitness for the present state 



OF THE BIBLE. 505 

of society. But would not this supposed excellence be a 
great defect ? In some other age of the world, where revolu- 
tions have altered all the existing relations of society, how 
deeply would be felt this deficiency in the Scriptures ! 
Why, then, should we seek to improve upon God's method 
of revealing truth ? AYhy should we imagine that our 
modern standard is any better than the standard of God's 
own choosing ? 

There is another mistake in respect to the inspiration of 
the Bible, deserving of careful consideration. It is that di- 
rect assertions of inspiration should be made hy each writer 
of the Bible to give sufficient proof of the plenary inspira- 
tion of the Scriptures. But upon what does the inspiration 
of the Scriptures rest ? I^ot simply upon their own assertion 
of inspiration. What would that assertion be worth were 
there no adaptation in the Bible to our wants, no miracles 
and no prophecies? To prove conclusively. the inspiration 
of the Bible, w^e must first consider those separate chains of 
argument embodied in the necessity, the adaptation, the 
miracles, the prophecies, the success of Christianity in the 
first century, and especially the perfect character of Christ 
and his divine mission. While these separate chains of 
proof exist, the Bible would be clearly of divine origin, even 
if not one word- was said of its inspiration. The inspiration 
of the Bible is shown far more by these tests than by any 
assertions by the sacred writers of their own inspiration. But 
the manner in which Christ referred to the Old Testament, 
the uniform respect and deference with which he treated it, 
the way in which it was regarded by the Jews, their scrupu- 
lous exactness in its preservation, the testimony of Josephus 
and all their historians to its sacred character, and the sub- 
sequent testimony to the inspiration of the ISTew Testament, 
combine to give a higher confirmation to the divine authority 
of the Bible. The difficulty in our ideas of the inspiration 
of the Bible is that we are constantly inclined to look only 
to one side of the question and to confine our view to one 
aspect of the subject. But let us consider that all the sep- 
arate proofs given to us of the divine authority of the Bible 



506 THE PLENARY INSPIRATION 

are intimately blended together, and, like the colors of the 
rainbow, form one glorious arch. 

Consider, then, the magnitude of the task of that man 
who attempts to prove the Bible uninspired. Before he can 
succeed in such a task, he must show false not one chain of 
proof, but the whole foundation upon which rests the inspira- 
tion of the Bible. He must, step by step, remove each 
separate chain from its place, and prove the whole a fabrica- 
tion of man. He must impeach the character of Christ 
himself, and prove the divine Author of Christianity either 
an impostor or an ignorant enthusiast. He must show that 
the writers of the Bible were either deceivers or deceived; 
and then, after establishing as a fact that the Bible is the 
work either of impostors or of men imposed upon, he must 
admit, in the very face of his successful logic, that the Bible, 
after all, is the most sublime, the most useful, the most ex- 
cellent production the world has ever seen, — that, true or 
false, to remove it from society would leave a blank so de- 
plorable as to make even atheism tremble and infidelity grow 
pale with fear. 

Upon such a foundation does the inspiration of the Bible 
rest. Did we look to one kind of proof alone, our minds 
might sometimes be troubled by the objections of the 
skeptic ; but when we consider that the inspiration of the 
Bible can lay claim, directly or indirectly, to all the separate 
chains of reasoning that go to prove the Scriptures from 
God, — when we consider that the deeper the examination the 
more clearly blazes forth the truth of the divinity of the 
Scriptures, — then truly do we have the highest demonstra- 
tion that they come from God. 

Of those who deny the plenary inspiration of the Bible, it 
may be asked, Why more difficult for God to have the whole 
Bible inspired than a part of it ? In nature we see no half- 
work; what is made is perfect in its kind, as it comes from 
God, and adapted to its end. Is it not as necessary that the 
written word should be as free from defects as the works of 
nature ? Is the mighty process of redemption in its record 
Jess important, and do we see a finish in the one that we do 



OF THE BIBLE, 507 

not in the other ? Consider that the separate chains of evi- 
dence upon which the entire inspiration of the Scriptures 
rests are not confined to one book of the Bible, but are 
common to the whole. When, therefore, we say such a 
part of the Bible is not inspired, to be consistent we must 
show that it is not linked in with the rest, and that its re- 
moval would be no injury to the whole. But can we 
cut out this or that part of the Bible as useless or as an 
excrescence? Can we treat the Holy Scriptures as we would 
treat a vase of precious stones and stubble and dirt and 
rubbish ? Can we say, Here are the precious stones, and here 
the useless rubbish ? But, if the Bible was only in part inspired, 
this would be a correct proceeding. The business of the 
commentator would be chiefly to separate the inspired from 
the uninspired ; to label one part of the Bible as from God 
and another as from man, — one as of divine authority and the 
other as only of human origin and consequently having no 
more than a human sanction. But, worse than this, upon 
such a supposition we are afloat upon a wide sea of uncer- 
tainty and doubt. Who can prove that any landmarks are 
given in the Bible by which one part may be shown human 
and another divine, — ane from God and another only from 
man ? Who can show those places that rest upon the infalli- 
ble authority of God, and those portions which are supported 
only by the fallible opinions of man ? Is it not easy to see that 
instead of our reason deciding upon the general fact of the 
Bible as the word of God, it must have put upon it the 
task of culling out the human from the divine, — that the 
infallibility of the Scriptures would be seriously injured? 
Here are two authorities, — one fallible, the other infallible, 
and both mixed up together. Where are we ? The boast of 
the Papal church is its infallibility, but the glory of Protest- 
antism is the belief in the one only infallible standard contained 
in the Bible. 

But when we admit that some parts of the Bible are from 
God and some parts not from God, — some portions divine, 
some only human, — we must, to be consistent, say that those 
parts of the Bible alone human must be fallible, and carry 



608 THE PLENARY INSPIBATION 

with tliem uo higher sanction than any other production of 
man. And then at once we oonie to the chief difficulty, 
How are these two parts to be so separated as always to be 
distinguished and never to blend into each other ? Would 
we not by this really give to Romanism its greatest power of 
assault, and confess that the church alone should say what is 
to be received as divine and what is to be rejected as only 
human ? Would we not say by this that the Bible was not 
to be read by all classes of persons, unless as interpreted by 
the constitutional authority of the church ? Thus it will be 
seen that the moment we undertake to cut up the Bible into 
two parts, one fallible and the other infallible, we weaken 
the evidence of the whole ; we give credit to the assumptions 
of the Romanists, and give the highest plausibility to the 
papal dogma of infallibility. 

The true idea of plenary inspiration leaves an ample mar- 
gin for the human element in the Bible, while it does not 
conflict with the divine element : it only insists upon the plain 
fact that what it indorses by God as his word should have 
his authority coexisting with it. In no other way can the Bible, 
with its ample proofs of divinity, have that influence over 
the human mind that belongs to it by equity and all reason. 
True, in the interpretation of the Bible according to the 
fundamental principle of Protestantism, every person must 
answer to his own conscience and to God for the word read ; 
but this is infinitely safer and ^aore in harmony with right 
liberty and wisdom, than having the Council of Trent decide 
upon our faith, or a papal priesthood tell us what of the 
Bible we should read and what we should not read, what 
we should believe upon in it and what we should not believe. 

One of the most fruitful sources of infidelity is the confused 
idea held as to the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures. 
Whether the Bible is indeed from God, or only from man, is 
the great question of the present day. It has been the question 
of all ages, and will be to all time to come, until sin, temp- 
tation, and all moral evil are banished from the earth. Con- 
stituted, then, as human nature is, fallen as it is, can it be 
expected that a book that comes into such antagonism 



OF THE BIBLE. 509 

with all sin, be it in the individual or in the State, that sets 
forth principles that cut at the root of every organized s^^steni 
of oppression or error, of superstition and wrong, should not 
encounter the most searching scrutiny ? The Bible welcomes 
such a scrutiny, but pronounces its anathema upon those who 
are compelled to confess its truth, its divinity, and yet who 
will not receive it or in any true sense believe in it. l^ow, 
we say that the Bible, affixing consequences so weighty upon 
its reception or rejection, will not, if from God, be deficient 
in evidence to show this. There is too much at stake to doubt 
for a moment this assertion. Consequently, the Bible may 
justly be said to be full of all evidences to show it from God. 
Yiew it under any or all aspects, and the mind is over- 
whelmed with the greatness and the variety of proof. It is 
most suitable that the plenary inspiration of the Bible should 
be just as it is, — no more, and no less. I^o more; for then 
the human element intimatelj- blended with it, interwoven 
like the thread in the very cloth itself, would be deficient, 
and then the Bible would lose its strongest access to the 
heart of man : it might be a better book for angels, but it 
would not be so good for man. All that plenary inspiration 
claims is just enough of divinity to give to the Holy Scriptures 
the royal seal of God's own hand; this, with all reasonable 
persons, should be sufficient. In the Bible, human instru- 
mentality, with the endless diversities of human feeling and 
expression, and the modes of thought common to one age of 
the world and to all ages, is made use of But this is its highest 
charm : it shows that, as the Sabbath was made for man, so 
the Bible was made for man ; it is man's book and it is God's 
book; it is man's treasure and God's blessing; it is man's 
birthright, and yet God's gift. All other books in contrast 
are insignificant; for it contains all .human wisdom and all 
divine wisdom, an incarnation of truth and a divinity of 
origin. Plenary inspiration is, then, appropriately the sum- 
ming up of all the other multitudinous evidences of the 
Bible, and carrying with them the declaration " that all 
Scripture is given by inspiration of God." So intimately 
blended together are all the Scriptures, that we cannot sever 



510 THE PLENARY INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE. 

one portion from the rest without invalidating the whole. 
To prove the Old Testament not divine, is not indeed to 
prove the ITew not from God ; but most seriously it injures 
the evidence of the IN'ew Testament. To prove one book of 
the Xew Testament not from God, does not disprove the 
other books; but it greatly weakens the strength of their 
evidence. 

In respect to the variations in different readings, they are 
too insignificant to deserve attention, and all can be referred 
to the diversity of copyists. In no respect can it be shown 
that they affect the fact of inspiration ; and as for errors, it is 
time enough to admit them when they are proved. More 
than eighteen centuries have elapsed since the death and the 
resurrection of Christ ; there has been no want of opposers 
and enemies to the Bible, of every variety of talent and 
every advantage of observation; and yet not a single error of 
any fact of history, any truth of science, or any contradiction 
of testimony among the writers of the Bible has been shown. 
Every discovery of science, every additional light thrown 
upon the history of the past, every research into antiquity, 
has only confirmed the truthfulness of the Bible. The prog- 
ress of knowledge has shown that the errors lay in our 
minds, not in the word of God, and that our ignorance was 
the mother of those faults that are attributed to the Bible. 
And thus will it be proved true that the Bible is inspired by 
God, even though the heavens and the earth should pass 
away. 



CHAPTEE XIX. 

HISTORIC OUTLINE OF THE OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 

The Old Testament marks a period of the world essentially 
difierent from the New Testament. TVith the former com- 
mence the creation of the world, the fall of man, the patri- 
archal and the legal dispensations. 

Let us consider the Old Testament in its revelation of God. 
But what is the mode of all revelation of God to us? Is it 
a complete communication of all truth at once, or is it the 
gradual unfolding of truth at diiferent periods of the world ? 
Evidently, the latter. And yet, because there is not the 
same communication of truth in the Old Testament as in the 
New, — because when the Christian economy commenced 
there was a higher development of truth, — many have under- 
rated the Old Testament ; they have imagined that it was 
superseded by the New Testament. But the New Testament 
uniformly confirms the Old and is built upon it. It indeed 
introduces us to a higher stage of truth, but at the same 
time it rests as a foundation upon the Old. In considering, 
then, the revelation of God in the Old Testament, we must 
bear in mind that this revelation was in accordance with the 
existing wants of the world. It was a revelation that was 
best adapted to the state of society existing before the ush- 
ering in of the Christian dispensation. Many seem to forget 
this great fact, in judging of the Old Testament. They do 
not carry their minds back to the early age of the world, and 
consider the peculiar wants of a period far remote from the 
present. The Old Testament has three distinct periods of 
time, — that which is comprised in the antediluvian world, 
that which is included in the post-diluvian age, or the age 
of the patriarchs, and that which comprehends the Mosaic 

(511) 



512 HISTORIC OUTLINE OF THE 

economy, or legal dispensation. The antediluvian world forms 
a period of history remarkable for its brevity. All that 
remains to us of this distant age is embodied in a few 
chapters of Genesis; but enough is told us to reveal the 
extreme apostas}^ of man and the mercy and justice of God. 
The age of the post-diluvian patriarchs makes known to 
us a period of the world recovering from the great catas- 
trophe of the deluge, with the confusion of tongues at Babel, 
and the regal authority invested in a few great heads of 
families. The Mosaic dispensation gives to us an election 
from the nations of the earth of a distinct people, who were 
destined to be the chosen depositaries of the Scriptures and 
to be signally distinguished by privileges and divine interpo- 
sitions in their favor. Thus the different ages of the world 
before the coming of Christ demanded a revelation from God 
adapted to the peculiar state of each period of time; and 
thus we find it. One melancholy fact, confirmed by all his- 
tory, is taught us in the Bible, — the extreme tendency of 
man to degenerate. ^Ye find this most clearly shown in the 
antediluvian world. Here we read of two classes, called the 
sons of God and the daughters of men, and of the rapid 
corruption of the better part of society by the unlawful in- 
tercourse with the most depraved, until the whole earth then 
peopled revealed one loathsome mass of moral pollution. 
A few good men in vain strove to resist the depravity of the 
times. Then came the deluge, sweeping away the guilty 
inhabitants of the world. But the antediluvian earth, from 
the great longevity of the population, had the noblest oppor- 
tunity of having through tradition a knowledge of the fall, 
and of becoming acquainted with the character of God. 
When the legal dispensation was introduced, we see a widely 
different state of the world. The new world had become to 
a great extent peopled. The confusion of tongues had 
resulted in scattering multitudes over the earth. But the 
whole earth then inhabited had relapsed into idolatry. The 
primitive ideas of God in his unity and moral excellence had 
been greatly obscured. Subordinate divinities had usurped 
the place of the supreme God, and the nations of the earth 



OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 513 

Lad followed after idols that neither see, nor hear, nor taste, 
nor smell, nor touch, — idols originally but representatives of 
imaginary gods, but whose worship soon degenerated into the 
deification of human beings. What, then, was the great de- 
sign of the legal dispensation ? It was to rescue a people from 
the grossness of the surrounding paganism, and free them 
from the bewitching snares of idolatry. But in what did 
the idolatry of the ancient world consist? AVas it the denial 
altogether of one supreme God, or was it not rather the 
gross corruption of this first truth of religion ? Evidently, 
the latter. 

The learned Cudworth has clearly proved " that the pagan 
polytheism must be understood as used for created intel- 
lectual beings, superior to men, that ought to be religiously 
worshiped. That this was no refinement or interpolation of 
paganism, as might possibly be suspected, but that the 
doctrine of the most ancient pagan theologers and greatest 
promoters of polytheism was agreeable hereunto. First, Zo- 
roaster, the chief promoter of polytheism in the Eastern parts, 
acknowledged one supreme Deity, the maker of the world, 
proved from Eubulus in Porphyry, besides his own words 
cited by Eusebius. That Orpheus, commonly called by the 
Greeks the Theologer, asserted one supreme Deity, proved 
by his own words out of pagan theology. That the Egyptians 
themselves, the most polytheistic of all nations, had an ac- 
knowledgment among them of one supreme Deity. That the 
poets, who were the greatest depravers of the pagan theology, 
and by their fables of the gods made it look more aristocrat- 
ically, did themselves, notwithstanding, acknowledge a mon- 
archy, one prince and father of gods. That all the pagan 
philosophers who were theist universally asserted a mundane 
monarchy. Pythagoras, as much apolytheist as any, and yet 
his first principle of things as well as numbers, a monad or 
unity. Anaxagoras, one mind ordering all things for good. 
Xenophanes, one and all, and his one god the greatest among 
gods." 

This opinion of Cudworth is high authority to confirm the 
fact that a First Cause, or Supreme God, was generally ac- 

33 



514 HIST OB I C OUTLINE OF THE 

kiiowledged amoug the ancient pagans. But here was the ^?'ert^ 
mistake. The idea of one supreme God was not only merely 
speculative, exerting no practical influence over the popular 
mind, but that idea was immeasurably corrupted by the intro- 
duction of subordinate divinities. God was forgotten among 
the increasing host of idols who had usurped the place of all 
worship. Thus, while one God in theory might be held to, 
in practice inferior divinities controlled the mind and ab- 
sorbed the affections of the multitude. Indeed, the pagan 
polytheism consisted in the deification of the creature and 
the total neo:lect of all devotion to the Creator. Commencino; 
in its mildest form with the worship of the sun and moon 
and stars, the adoration of fire and the elements of earth, 
air, and w^ater, it passed through successive stages of degen- 
eracy until it comprehended the adoration of the meanest of 
reptiles and insects. Thus the host of gods continued to in- 
crease, until in some places there were as many gods as 
people, thirty thousand being reckoned at Rome itself. But 
the worst feature connected with the pagan polytheism was the 
rapid corruption of manners from the deiiication of things 
vicious and contemptible. When the standard of moral 
excellence was so low, what must have been the depravity en- 
gendered ! Thus, we see the most cruel rites, the most licen- 
tious practices, connected with the worship of the gods. The 
intellect and heart were immeasurably debased. The most 
sacred relations of the family were grossly broken in upon, 
and the transition was rapid from the corruption of manners 
to the most galling servitude of body. 

Another feature connected with the ancient polytheism 
was its alliance with the state. The state upheld the popu- 
lar religion, and the religion upheld the state. What was the 
consequence? Political slavery went hand in hand with the 
superstition of the masses, and the idolatry of the people 
helped on the tyranny of kings and nobles. Thus was 
ancient paganism not only the source of the deepest moral 
corruption, robbing God of his rightful homage, removing 
from the mind the restraining fear of an All- wise Being, ab- 
solving from human love his attributes of goodness and 



OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 515 

mercy, and eradicating from the mind the lofty hopes his 
true worship only can create. But ancient paganism was a 
terrific state engine. Superstition, taking the place of the 
true worship of God, brought with it civil bondage. Forg- 
ing a double chain for mind and body, it plunged the human 
family into a deeper abyss of wretchedness. Taking advan- 
tage of tlie principle in man that upbraids for sin, it held 
over an enslaved conscience a whip of scorpions. Cruelty 
and impiety w^ere the constant attendants upon pagan super- 
stition ; but there followed in its train, also, a demon as fear- 
ful, — that of universal political and moral slavery. Thus, 
w^herever pagan superstition most abounded, there also it 
engendered a more debasing bondage of body and mind. 
Freedom died upon her impure and bloody altars, and even 
the natural virtues became ferocious wdien nurtured by her 
unhallowed religion. The guilt of pagan superstition and the 
idolatry created b}' it consisted in an abuse of the light of 
nature, and the reckless disregard of the light communi- 
cated through tradition from the earliest ages. The growing 
love of idol- worship engendered worse idols, and the corrupt 
philosophy and poetry of the ancients introduced a more 
debasing condition of things. The words of the Apostle 
Paul give us a true picture of the sin of heathendom : " Be- 
cause that when they knew God, they glorified him not as 
God, neither were thankful ; but became vain in their im- 
aginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Profess- 
ing themselves to be Vise, they became fools, and changed 
the incorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible 
man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping 
things." 

What, then, was the great design of the Jewish theocracy 
and the legal dispensation ? It was, evidently, to counteract 
the ancient idolatry and preserve the worship of the true God. 
The end to be secured was to unveil the character of God 
with greater distinctness, and select a nation for the preser- 
vation of the divine oracles. But how could this end be 
reached without the miraculous interposition of God ? When 
Abraham was called, we see in the father of the faithful tlie 



516 HISTORIC OUTLINE OF THE 

first commencement of tliat series of divine interpositions 
that were, through successive ages, to grow brighter and 
brighter, and secure the great end of rescuing the world 
from total apostasy. Many seem to forget the peculiar cir- 
cumstances that demanded the Jewish theocracy, and the 
mighty reasons for that series of stupendous miracles that 
took place upon the leading of the Israelites from Egypt. 
Egypt then was the most powerful and civilized nation of 
the earth. But all this supremacy imparted only a more fatal 
energy to the debasing superstitions of the Egyptians. The 
land of Egypt had degenerated into a land of idols. Priestly 
and civil tyranny, both wedded to the grossest idolatry, had 
withered the virtues of the people and given to their vices a 
more than ordinary virulence. 

What was to be done ? If the world w^as ever after to be 
redeemed, or future millions preserved from total estrange- 
ment from God, what better course could be conceived of 
than was devised to turn back the tide of moi-al corruption 
that was fast fitting the world for another deluge? The 
Israelites never would have followed Moses, never would 
have submitted to the long journey in the desert, never 
would have obeyed his rigid enactments, had not his mission 
to them been most clearly proved to be divine. How absurd 
the supposition that nearly three millions of people would 
all consent to leave their home in Egypt, to encounter the 
perils of the desert, to give up the idol-worship of their 
Egyptian masters, to wander with no* natural means of sub- 
sistence for so many years in the desert, if God had not 
directly interposed to supply their wants! 

But the great fact of the drowning of the Egyptians in the 
Red Sea has been confirmed by sacred and profane history. 
1^0 proof has ever been offered to show that this memorable 
event did not take place. Here, then, in the miracles worked 
for the preservation of the Israelites and the ruin of their 
tyrannical masters, we see the great end secured of interpos- 
ing a barrier to the wide-spread desolations of polytheism. 
Everything was adapted to this end. The ancient systems 
of superstition took captive the senses. Stealing with magical 



OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 517 

power over the heart, they corrupted the affections. Their 
superstition, allying itself with the state, wielded the power 
of the civil magistrate, and, both being linked together, there 
followed one vast system of bondage to body and mind, and 
the gross corruption of morals. The worship of the one true 
God was forgotten in the homage paid to inferior divinities, 
and the tendencies of the human heart, naturally downward, 
received from the reigning idolatry a threefold energ}^ for evil. 
Conceive, then, if possible, how dark must have been the 
prospects of the world if no such system as the Mosaic econ- 
omy had been introduced. Superficial and unthinking minds 
look with contempt upon the Jewish ritual and the peculiar 
laws and ordinances of the Israelites. They seem to think 
unnecessary the forms of the theocracy, and all the details 
of the temple service and priesthood and sacrifice. They 
cannot understand the meaning of so strict a ceremonial and 
such rigid rites. But are such persons conscious w^hat the 
condition of the world then was, and what was the peculiar 
character of the Jewish mind? Do they imagine that, with 
their constant tendency to relapse into the gorgeous idolatry 
of the heathen around them, they needed nothing to strike 
favorably the senses and beguile them from the snares of 
false idols ? The whole system of the Jewish theocracy was 
admirably adapted to the wants of the Israelites. Their cere- 
monies, free from the impurity and cruelty of the heathen 
rites, were most happily designed to wean them from their 
attachment to idolatry-. All their rites were calculated to 
make a deep impression upon the senses, and thus to forestall 
the fascinations of heathen worship; and yet their w^orship 
was highly spiritual. God was recognized as the supreme 
authority, and the temporal rewards and •chastisements he 
sent w^ere of the very nature to deliver the mind from the 
bondage of idolatry. We have spoken of the union of church 
and state among the heathen, of the intimate connection of 
the civil and the ecclesiastical power, and of the immeasura- 
ble strength given to idolatry hy this course. The Jewish 
theocracy struck a death-blow at the universal triumph of 
superstition: by uniting the civil with the religious govern 



518 HISTOBIC OUTLINE OF THE 

ment of the Jews, bj making the authority of God supreme 
ill church and in state, it linked both together at a period of 
the world when every external restraint was needed to sup- 
press the encroachments of heathenism. 

The power of ancient paganism consiste^l especially in 
leading the mind of the people to believe that the control of 
their o^ods was exercised in all their domestic concerns and 
all their civil relations. The one God obscurely recognized by 
the multitude was fors^otten in the host of subordinate divini- 
ties that took under their management the everyday' aliairs of 
life and all their social and political relations. Consequently, 
all true ideas of the providence of God, extending to all 
things, exercising a care over the smallest as well as the 
greatest affairs of life, were wholly lost sight of With this 
forgetfulness, all homage of God was corrupted into the 
worship of his creatures; and false idols took away that 
sense of duty, of obligation, of fear, of hope and love, that 
should be centered upon the one God. The church and 
state mutually sustaining each other in corruption, both 
secured the fatal bondage of mind and heart. But the 
Jewish theocracy, by uniting church and state, by making 
all authority to emanate from God, presented a double barrier 
to the encroachments of superstition. God, in his daily 
providence ; God, in his hatred of idols ; God, in his per- 
sonal agency; God, as the lewarder of the good; God, as 
the immediate author of temporal prosperity or adversity ; 
God, as forgiving sin through the medium of sacrifices ; 
God, as a visible guide, infinite in power and goodness ; God, 
in his divine unity, abhorring any representation by images, — 
this was the great barrier against the attacks of idolatry. 
Here idolatry was met upon its own ground. Superstition 
had bound, for greater strength, church and state together; 
the Jewish theocracy cemented in one bond of friendship 
the civil and religious power. Superstition had captivated 
the senses by imposing rites and a gorgeous ceremonial ; the 
Jewish theocracy gave rites more imposing and a ceremonial 
far more lofty and grand. Superstition had seduced the 
conscience by a false expiation in sacrifices to idols ; the 



OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 519 

Jewish theocracy gave peace to the troubled conscieuce by 
pure sacrifices to the one God. Superstition taught the 
providence of innumerable gods x)ver all the affairs of life; 
the Jewish theocracy inculcated the providence of God in 
everything relating to this earthly existence. Superstition 
invoked temporal sanctions, and all the motives drawn from 
earthly prosperity or adversity, to sus-tain its power over the 
mind ; tlie Jewish theocracy also revealed earthly sanctions, 
and powerfully influenced the mind by fear and hope, drawn 
from worldly adversity or prosperity. 

Thus it will be seen that, wherever the sway of false idols 
extended, there yet existed upon the earth one living illus- 
tration of the one only true God. The Jewish theocracy, 
resplendent in miracles, made invincible by the personal inter- 
position of God, stood like a mighty rock against the waves of 
superstition that rolled against it. It met superstition at every 
avenue. It lived as a constant rebuke to the grossiiess of 
idolatry. Both by rewarding the Israelites for obedience 
and by punishing them for disobedience, it gave a lesson of 
infinite value to the world. It rescued the unity of God from 
the fatal perversions of superstition, enforced its sacredness 
by demonstrations of almighty power, and threw gleams of 
light over that moral darkness that had settled upon the 
nations. But the Jewish theocracy was most wonderfully 
adapted for the illustration of an atonement for sin. There is 
no error more fatal than the belief that the obedience of the 
sinner can atone for sin, or satisfy the demands of infinite 
justice. But in all the sacrifices of the Jews the doctrine was 
distinctly taught that some way was provided, symbolized by 
the blood of the Lamb, for the expiation of sin. Here con- 
science found a valid ground of hope; here it rested under 
its load of sin. The Jew^ish theocracy inculcated faith, the 
very principle that lies at the foundation of all true religion, 
and the only thing that can ever lead the heart to a cheerful 
obedience. But here was its infinite superiority to the super- 
stitious belief of the heathen. The faith in false idols, in 
their power of averting calamity or giving favors, was a 
false faith, — a faith of incalculable mischief to the heart, for 



520 HISTORIC OUTLINE OF THE 

it was at war alike with true reasoD and true piety. But the 
faith demanded of the Israelites in the offering up of sacrifices 
was a faith that embodied in it a security, a reasonable sense 
of acceptance with God, that superstition was utterly deficient 
in. Consequently, the whole system of Jewish theocracy 
was most a})propriate for an introduction to the Christian 
dispensation. It had a part to fulfill of the greatest impor- 
tance in the ushering in of a nobler system upon the world. 
Let us, then, look to some of the principles of the Hebrew 
polity, as revealing the character and attributes of God. One 
great truth, that of the creation, was taught by Moses in a 
way unknown to heathen philosophers. The reason of man, 
attempting to go beyond its depth and to plunge into the 
deepest mysteries, made darkness more dark, and led the 
popular mind into greater errors than, even the tlieology 
of the poets. A misguided fancy was bad enough, but 
the misguided philosophy of the ancients was v,^orse. The 
former was the mother of superstition, but the latter of the 
most pernicious skepticism. Thus the popular mind, vi- 
brating between the two extremes of superstition and 
infidelity, never became fixed upon the great truth of God 
as the Creator of the world. Thus, erroneous upon the first 
truth of revelation, there was no limit to the multiplication 
of gods representing the greatest inconsistency of principle, 
so that divinities grew in number as the world became older, 
and were more corrupt in the highest civilization than even 
in the depths of savage existence. Thus, while on the one 
side ignorance was the parent of superstition, upon the other 
side knowledge became the author of the highest refinement 
of cruelty and corruption. Thus, had it not been for the 
Jewish theocracy, the world would have lost its last hope. 
But upon the great fact of the creation of the world the Mo- 
saic record is nrost clear and authoritative. Here an amount 
of knowledge is communicated vastly surpassing all the learn- 
ing of paganism. In nothing was the impotence of heathen 
philosophy more clearly displayed than in its vain attempt to 
thread its way through the ages of patriarchal and antedilu- 
vian times. Here science and poetry and history threw only 



OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 521 

famt gleams of light, that seemed hut to make more palpa- 
hle the darkness that involved in ohlivion the earl}' ages of 
the world. Bat the Mosaic record, hy hrieily communicat- 
ing the fact of the creation and the fall of man, at one stroke 
demolished all the theories of pagan theologers. The fall of 
our first parents is the only kev that explains the mystery of 
human corruption, while at the same time it reveals the 
necessity of the direct interposition of God to counteract the 
inevitable ruin of that fall. The Hebrew polity revealed 
also the great fact that the worship of God, the purity of 
his service, was a higher end than state expediency. With 
the heathen, religion was made subservient to the state ; 
simonoj the Jews, the state was subservient to relio:ion. In the 
Jewish polity, the salvation of the state, its noblest develop- 
ment, its highest prosperity, were made to hang upon the 
purity of the worship of God. Thus, the Sabbath to be kept 
holy w^as recognized as of binding obligation upon the 
people, — the public worship of God was to be strictly ob- 
served, — the ceremonial law, demanding the greatest personal 
cleanliness and purity of sacrifice, was in every place en- 
joined. The priesthood were placed above a slavish depend- 
ence upon the caprice of the multitude, and their support 
was a duty that involved the very existence of their polity 
and state. The state in its very existence hung upon the 
obedience of God. With this obedience came glory and pros- 
perity ; without it, disgrace and ruin. The system of the 
Jewish theocracy was designed to be a living contrast to 
heathenism and an ever-present rebuke to false idols. In 
the land of Judea there was a demonstration to be made of 
the momentous truth that the worship of the one God was 
an end immeasurably superior to any other object. What was 
the revelation of God and of his attributes in that worship ? 
First, God in his unity was made known, God as the infinite 
Father, God as the Creator, God as transcendently just and 
good and merciful and forgiving of oifenses, — God, through 
the institution of sacrifices, as making known a way of re- 
demption for the sinner, — God as a personal agent, — God in 
his love of men of sincerity and truth, of men liberal and 



522 HISTORIC OUTLINE OF THE 

kind toward strangers and charitable to the poor, — God in 
his purity, — God the avenger of the oppressed, the punisher 
of the sacrilegious and the licentious, — God in his greatness, 
his omniscience, omnipresence, and omnipotence. Thus the 
Hebrew polity was not more singular in its construction 
than adapted to the end of the redemption of a nation and 
the salvation of millions. To make more conspicuous the 
personal agency and character of the true God, all the cir- 
cumstances connected with the Jewish state were such as to 
preclude the glory of man or the arrogance of human boast- 
ing. Small in territory, surrounded by rival or hostile com- 
munities, unwarlike as a nation, the Jewish state was con- 
fined within a narrow circle. In human learning it was 
greatly surpassed by heathen nations. Judea was not the 
land for philosophy or for science. The Jews were not the 
warriors of the earth. Their generals led no great armies far 
off into the remote regions of Asia or Africa. No Jewish 
legions entered the w^astes of Europe. The wars of the Jews 
were wars more of protection than of aggression. 

The chosen people were confined to a territory compara- 
tively small. It was the purity of religious worship, the 
preservation of the church, for which the whole Hebrew 
polity was instituted. The glory of foreign conquests, the 
glitter of human learning, the refinement of philosophy, the 
beauties of statuary or painting, the magic of science, did 
not belong to the Jewish theocrac3\ Why not? Evidently, 
because the whole design of the system was to make God 
everything and man nothing. It was to show the immeas- 
urable superiority of the true w^orship of God and of the duties 
that grow from his service, to the glitter of human glory or 
the pride of human art or learning. AVhat was the result ? 
Judea was a moral oasis in the great desert of the world. 
In spite of all the apostasy of the Jews, notwithstanding their 
constant declension into idolatry, the ancient world never 
saw a land so blessed as Palestine. 

While the lust of conquest swept as a desolating scourge 
over the earth, while war brought political slavery and a new 
host of idols in its train, Judea probably enjoyed a higher 



OLD TESTA ME XT THEOLOGY. 523 

degree of real freedom than the whole world besides. Its 
law enjoiuing a seven-years jubilee and absolving the help- 
less from degrading bondage had in it more of true liberty 
than all the exaggerated freedom of Greece or Rome. AVith 
Greece and Rome, state considerations were everything, 
moral considerations nothing. The highest virtue was patri- 
otism, or obedience to the state; but the state was a coalition 
of idolatry and the spirit of war. The one hekl a sword 
over the soul, the other over the body ; the one was moral, the 
other militar\', despotism. But in Judea servitude died out 
before the worsliip of God, and oppression was rebuked the 
more the true spirit of the theocracy was cultivated. In 
Athens there were usually from ten to thirty thousand free- 
men; but the shives amounted to four hundred thousand, and 
even more. The freemen of Sparta and Rome were not 
more numerous, in proportion to those whom they held in a 
slavery even more terrible than the Athenian. To use the 
language of Edmund Burke, - The free states never formed, 
though they were taken all together, the thousandth part of 
the habitable globe; the freemen in those states were never 
the twentieth part of the people; and the time they subsisted 
is scarce anvthiui^ in that immense ocean of duration in 
which time are so nearly commensurate. Therefore, call 
these free states, or popular governments, or what you please. 
when we consider the majority of their inhabitants and 
regard the natural rights of mankind, they must appear 
in reality and truth no better than pitiful and oppressive 
oligarchies." 

But the Hebrew polity was not more eminently favorable 
to freedom and adapted to secure the highest practicable 
civil and religious liberty, than it was deeply opposed to the 
common crimes of the heathen. In Sparta infanticide was 
enacted by law. The parent in Rome had absolute con- 
trol of the life of his children. The murder of children was 
often a part of the religious worship of the heathen. The 
whole system of paganism is pervaded with the spirit of 
cruelty to aged parents and to children, and also with the 
most wide-spread dissuluteness of manners. ^V^len cruelty and 



524 HISTORIC OUTLINE OF THE 

impurity entered into the very heart of heathen religion, 
what must have been the CDrruption engendered among the 
worshipers ! 

How foreign was all this from the Jewish code, when 
the professed design of that code was to present a contrast 
as great as possible to the religion and manners of pagan 
nations ! Thus, we read the language, " Detile not ye your- 
selves in any of these things, for in all these the nations are 
defiled which I cast out before you, and the land is defiled ; 
therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land 
itself vomiteth out her inhabitants." *' Ye shall be holy unto 
me ; for I the Lord thy God am holy, and have severed 3'ou 
from other people that ye should be mine." 

The prevailing spii'it of the Hebrew literature is shown 
in the Scriptures as noble and pure. Moses was not a law- 
giver only, but a moralist. Outward obedience to law was 
not only enjoined, but the true spirit of divine law was 
taught, commanding not only not to steal, but not to covet. 
A good state of mind and heart w^as enjoined, as much 
as external conformity to rulers. The Hebrew literature 
and history, as given to us in the books of Moses and the 
writings of the prophets and eminent men recorded in the 
Bible, not only reveal the character of God in a way so sen- 
sible and plain as to reach every understanding, but in the 
way that is best adapted to give us grand and pure concep- 
tions of the divine nature and attributes. Extending over 
so many centuries, composed of such a diversity of persons, 
one would imagine that all unity would be lost and errors 
innumerable would creep in. And thus it would be w^ere 
the books of the Old Testament not inspired, ^ot so. Al- 
though written in popular language, although using the ut- 
most freedom of description, there exists in the Bible no error 
in science, no u.w'orthy conception of the divine character. 
God is revealed not in the abstract, as an idea, a spiritual 
substance, a vague First Cause, a mere originator of matter, 
or the first order or law of things, not with the indetiniteness 
of heathen sages, nor yet clothed in the sensuous dress of 
poetic genius. But he is everywhere spoken of as a personal 



OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 525 

God; he is delineated in all the vividness of actual life, feel- 
ing, thinking, seeing, knowing, acting, loving all good, 
hating all evil, a rewarder of righteousness, an avenger of 
sin, superintending the works of his hands, divinely one in 
his substance, infinitely pure and good, self-existing from 
eternity, one Father in heaven, and one omnipotent King 
upon earth. What if pagan nations excelled the Jews in 
mere earthly literature or learning? what if Palestine was 
despised before great emperors whose dominion extended 
over the remotest regions of the world ? Avhat if the glory 
of arms was the ruling passion of the nations of antiquity ? 
what if battle-fields and the blood of slaughtered enemies 
were the highest themes of poetic praise ? what if Roman 
conquests or Grecian statuarj^ and painting called forth the 
noblest art of the historian? — yet Hebrew literature, sublimely 
great in its theme, majestic with the fire of inspiration, noble 
as the lofty song of praise that echoed within the walls of the 
consecrated temple, divinely pure and grand as the evening 
sky trembling all over with starry pulses of glory, could yet 
thro\y into the shade all pagan learning and art. Before the 
words of the sacred prophet we bow the knee and are 
silent: 

'' Thou, God, hast laid of old the foundations of the 
earth, and the heavens are the work of thy hands; they shall 
perish, but thou shalt endure; yea, all of them shall wax 
old like a garment ; as a vesture shalt thou change them, 
and they shall be changed ; but thou art the same, and thy 
years shall have no end." 



CHAPTER XX. 

HISTORIC OUTLINE OF THE XEW TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 

All history reveals the great fact that the revelation of 
God is given in the most appropriate period for such a reve- 
lation. "When we come to the period of the Christian dispen- 
sation, we come to a state of the world very different from 
the ages that preceded it. The Roman power was then in 
its glory. It was in the Augustan age of Rome that Christ 
our Saviour came to this world. It was in the fullness of time 
that the Son of God became incarnate and provided a way 
for the redemption of the earth. In the dream of ]!^ebu- 
chadnezzar we read of the great image of gold, silver, brass, 
and iron, symbolizing four leading monarchies of the w.orld, 
— the Babylonian, the Persian, the Grecian, and the Roman. 
The inspired Daniel portrayed, before the monarch of famed 
Babylon, the destiny of those kingdoms that were to succeed 
each other and each in turn ravage the earth. First came 
Babylon, the richest nation of the East. ^Nebuchadnezzar, 
exulting in the pride of his power, saw, in the words of the 
prophet, his vast dominion pass into the hands of Persia. 
Then Persia, with her gorgeous pomp and servitude, came 
under the brazen sway of the Grecians. Then Greece, the 
land of philosophy and poetry, fell beneath the iron rule of 
Rome. Here were four great powers, each to succeed the 
other ; each was to exert a mighty influence over the world, 
and each at last was to be conquered by the power that 
came after it. But there was a fifth powder, greater than all 
the other powers put together. It was a power distinct from 
the powers represented by the gold, silver, brass, and iron of 
the image. It was a power supernatural in its origin, sym- 
bolized by a stone cut out without hands, which smote the 
( 526 ) 



THE NEW TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 527 

image upon his feet, that were of iron and clay, and broke . 
them to pieces. Looking upon the historic map of the 
world, let us briefly survey those four great powers that 
were ultimately to be supplanted by the fifth power, spoken 
of in the prophetic words, "And in the days of those kings 
shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never 
be destroyed ; and the kingdom shall not be left to other 
people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these 
kingdoms, and it shall stand forever." Babylon, the pow- 
erful oppressor of the Jews, in one memorable night fell 
before the arms of Cyrus the Persian. The infatuated 
monarch, at a great festival, had left the gates of the city 
open, and himself and his lords were reveling together 
when a mysterious handwriting upon the walls of the palace 
made his knees to tremble, and foretold the immediate ruin 
of himself and his kingdom. Soon the city was captured by 
the Medes and Persians. Less than two hundred years after, 
the general profligacy of paganism, the wide-spread dissipa- 
tion of manners, the fruit of luxury and despotism, and the 
oppression of the chosen people, hurried on the ruin of the 
mighty Persian empire. Alexander, the most resistless de- 
vastator the world has ever seen, in two years laid the 
Persian monarchy even with the ground. But the empire 
^ of the Macedonian soldier, reared by ambition and bloody 
fell in fragments on his grave. Four dynasties divided the 
power of Alexander ; but the two most sanguinary and hostile 
to Palestine were the Ptolemies and the Seleucidse, the sove- 
reigns of Egypt and of Syria. From the division of the Mace- 
donian empire to the reign of Herod Jerusalem was captured 
six times by foreign armies. For two hundred years Judea 
witnessed a fearful duration of misery and carnage. Li the 
language of Josephus, " The Jews resembled a ship tossed 
by a hurricane and bufteted on both sides by the waves, 
while they lay in the midst of contending seas." Li that 
century events of transcendent interest were crowded, even 
the birth, life, and death of Christ, the promulgation of Chris- 
tianity, the destruction of Jerusalem, and the final ruin of the 
Jewish nation. But the Roman power that then triumphed 



628 HISTORIC OUTLINE OF THE 

over the earth was a power of iron. It consolidated in one 
vast empire the whole civilized earth. It extended from the 
Caucasus to Mauritania, and from the rising to the setting 
of the sun. Nothing could withstand the colossal strength 
of the Eoman legions. Greece overran the earth, — Rome 
conquered it. Rome itself w^as but a military camp, vast, 
resistless, and unyielding. With an energy undaunted by 
the greatest obstacles, the Roman armies brought under their 
sway the remotest regions of the earth. When Christianity 
was given to the world, the Roman empire had received that 
form of government which was best adapted to its universal 
diffusion. It was a government that had the energy of a 
republic with the broad ambition of a monarchy. Roman 
arms introduced civilization. Hostile nations were united 
under one vast power. The science and literature of the 
conquered were welcomed in the imperial city. Memorable 
was that general peace which for a short time, in the reign 
of Augustus Cpesar, rested upon the earth. It was fitting 
that the Prince of Peace should come at a time when the 
clash of arms was hushed, and belligerent nations took a 
short respite before the world was again to be given up to 
foreign and civil violence. Gently, almost unnoticed and 
unknown, did the fifth power, symbolized by the stone cut 
out without hands, make its appearance. 

In Bethlehem of Judea there was born, in the manger of 
oxen, an infant. The shepherds, keeping their sheep by 
night, heard the song of the angels, and, guided by a star of 
glory, visited the little stranger. The world's Redeemer, 
heralded by angels, came in poverty, obscurity, and want. 
In a Roman palace there sat a dark-minded man. Restlessly 
did Herod ponder over the prophetic intimations of the mys- 
terious king who loas to come. The public mind was awake. 
The wise men of the land were looking for some great event. 
The suspicious Herod issues his decree. There is weeping 
with the mothers of Bethlehem. The savage command had 
had gone forth and spent its force in vain. The parents 
depart with the young child into Egypt, and there for thirty 
years dwells the Son of God. The time of his public mission 



NEW TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 529 

commences. For three years he becomes the great teacher 
of his countrymen. He works miracles to prove his divinity. 
He speaks the word, and the dead are raised. He heals the 
blind. The ears of the deaf are opened. The lepers are 
cleansed, and the lame are made whole. The sick in a mo- 
ment are restored to health. He walks upon the waves of the 
sea. The winds obey his voice. Christ, our Saviour, was the 
world's creditor, but the world knew^ him not. His disciples 
that followed him misunderstood him. He was despised and 
rejected of men. But before his wisdom human malice stood 
abashed. Enemies innumerable surrounded his path. The 
chief priests and scribes seek his death. Before the Roman 
governor he is brought. The multitude cry out, " 'Not this 
man, but Barabbas !" A slavish fear stifles the sentiment of 
humanity and justice in Pilate. Christ is crucified between 
two thieves. Hours big with the destiny of the world roll 
on. The last moment comes. The words, " it is finished^'' 
fall from the lips of Jesus. The battle is fought and won. 
Christ is laid in the grave. In three days he breaks from the 
bondage of the tomb. Death is conquered. Our Saviour 
ascends to God his Father, and now begin the great victories 
of the kingdom of the stone. 

In the survey of the early prophetic developments of the 
kingdom of the stone that was to appear during the exist- 
ence of the four great powers of the earth, and destined to 
break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and to 
stand forever, let us contemplate two things as revealing 
God and his attributes : 

1st. What is Christianity ? 

2d. What is the relation it sustains to the world, and its 
ultimate condition in the world ? 

" The true conception of Christianity," says Croly, " is not 
that of a new religion, but of an old receiving a more perfect 
form ; the seed planted in the day of Abraham, shut up but 
maturing in the day of Judah, and shooting above the earth 
in the day of Christ ; the primal faith, buried in weakness to 
be raised in power ; the body laid in the grave with the 
patriarchal dispensation ; the spirit existing, but separate 

34 



530 HISTORIC OUTLINE OF THE 

and viewless, in the Mosaic ; the spirit and body reunited, 
with more vivid attributes, a nobler shape, and a perpetual 
existence, in the Christian. The apostles continually declare 
this identity of principle with the religion of Abraham. 
They claim expressly under the Abrahamic covenant. St. 
Paul, alternately astonished at the dullness and indignant 
at the prejudice which could doubt that he himself was a 
champion of the true national religion, cries out, ' For the 
hope of Israel am I bound with this chain.' He unhesi- 
tatingly accounts for the reluctance of the Jews to adopt 
Christianity, not on ground that they were wedded to the 
religion of Abraham, but that they had substituted another 
in its place ; and loftily denies their claim to the very title 
of Israelite : ' all are not Israel that are of Israel.' Peter, 
like the preachers of righteousness in the days before the 
flood, warns the Jews of the ruin which is the inevitable 
consequence of their apostasy from the primal faith; and our 
Lord himself, in the most distinct, detailed, and impressive 
declaration of divine wrath ever given, first charges the 
people with revolt from the spirit of this faith, and then pro- 
nounces the coming of that deluge of fire and sword which 
was to extirpate the being of the nation as the result of the 
crime." 

Thus, it will be seen that Christianity in its spirit was es- 
sentially the same with the religion of the patriarchal and 
Mosaic dispensations. But in what respects did it differ? 
Just as the full development of a tree differs from its infancy 
and early youth; just as the body of the child differs from 
the maturity of a man. The primal faith had existed from 
the fall; it lived in the hearts of the good of antediluvian 
times; it inspired the devotions of the early patriarchs; it 
assumed a national, visible form in the Mosaic economy; it 
took upon itself a more glorious shape in the Christian dis- 
pensation. Old as the world, it called upon man in every 
age to recognize the great truth of God infinite in justice, 
goodness, and mercy. But in the Christian dispensation 
gleams of vivid light revealed God not only in his unity, 
but in the threefold existence of his unity. God the Father, 



A^^TT" TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 531 

God the Son, and God the Eternal Spirit were the three 
personal agents made known in the vast system of redemp- 
tion; a mystery expUiining the deep secrets of the moral nni- 
verse, yet most unexpLained in itself. 

Thus the Christian was called upon to recognize, in his 
salvation, three personal agents, — the Father, the Redeemer, 
the Sanctifier, unity in trinity, trinity in unity. It was the 
glory of the Xew Testament to unfold the system of re- 
demption so as to meet the wants of all ages and all classes, 
so as to reveal God in his attributes of mercy, condescension, 
compassion and love, in a way impossible b}^ the light of 
nature. God incarnate in Christ was that mysterj- of myste- 
ries that upheaved the foundations of the old world, changed 
the whole aspect of society, gave to man the security of a 
happy immortality, and disarmed death of its dread sting. 
The cross became the hope of millions. An empire was 
founded before whose victories the exploits of Alexander 
or Caesar became infinitely insignificant. 

Thus, the religion of Christ embodied in it every truth 
known before, with truths peculiarly its own. It spoke of 
the world to come in its spirituality and its happiness, of the 
resurrection, and the judgment. But Christianity in its na- 
ture was universal, and not local. It was not a religion pe- 
culiarly for the Jew, but a religion as much for the Gentile 
as the Jew, a religion that comprehended the world. Its 
very forms were simple, adapted for all ages and nations. 
Its whole spirit was fitted for the moral elevation of man, 
calling forth the exercise of ever}' virtue, and making the 
heart no less happy than good. But Christianity was also 
the noblest development of moral freedom. So clearly did 
it teach the relations of man to man, and of man to God, 
that its reception into the heart emancipated the conscience 
and redeemed the soul. It brought with it the restoration 
of man. By making supreme the authority of God, and 
infallible the declarations of his word, it eftectually delivered 
the conscience' from the tyrannj' of man. 

Thus, the gospel, wherever it made progress, and just so 
far as it was welcomed in its purity, laid a foundation for 



532 HISTORIC OUTLINE OF THE 

true liberty sucli as tlie world had never before seen. It 
was not in Jerusalem that God onl}^ was to be worshiped, 
it was not alone to the chosen people that Christ came upon 
his mission of love. Wide as the world were to be the tri- 
umphs of the cross, boundless as tb.e wants of man were 
to be the blessings of the gospel. Consequently, there 
was the development of a power immeasurably superior to 
Roman arms. It came in direct collision with the iron sway 
of the fourth kingdom. Its war was personal with pagan 
idolatry. It entered into no compromise with the tyranny 
and impurity of superstition. It was death to civil and reli- 
gious despotism. 

Thus a divine force was revealed, — a power that trampled 
into the dust the altar and the throne of paganism, a power 
that hui'led defiance at the whole pantheon of heathen gods. 
Judaism was local, and could not call forth the same hostility 
of superstition ; Christianity was universal, and essentially 
aggressive. Consequently, superstition and Christianity could 
not live together. The triumph of one was the death of the 
other. The world had either to exterminate Christianity or 
to corrupt it. It could not exist in its purity in alliance with 
superstition. Hence the reason for its hatred, and those lierce 
battles that were fought to stay its progress. Christianity is 
especially to man the highest development of the character 
of God. Christ was God manifest in the flesh; his humanity 
shot forth vivid gleams of light that unveiled the heart of the 
Deity himself. The disclosures of truth are far greater in the 
Xew than in the Old Testament. Christ impersonated the 
virtues of God. In him purity, love, compassion, truth, were 
divinely embodied. The virtues of Christ were virtues sub- 
jected to the severest trials, virtues godlike and infinite. 
The character of God was represented to man so sensibly 
that Christ himself was declared to be the express image of 
the Father. In him was a revelation of goodness such alone 
as reigns in the heart of God. In him was mercy delineated 
such as God alone could manifest. In him was love expressed 
whose depth was infinite, — love boundless as the great ocean 
of eternity, love vast as the universe, love not only re- 



NEW TESTAMENT THEOLOGY. 533 

vealed in glory, not only resplendent upon its throne of 
dominion, love not only grand as heralded by angels and 
sweet as the music of heaven's choir, but love in suffering, 
love groaning beneath the terrors of divine law, love ex- 
piring upon the cross, love resting itself in the grave of 
man. Here was a development of God such as the world 
had never before seen, — a development of God in his conde- 
scension, whose myster}^ the angels desire to look into. It is 
not abstract virtue, but impersonated virtue, that most moves 
the heart of man ; virtue sensible, virtue in action, virtue in 
trial, virtue a living embodiment of thought, feeling, pur- 
pose, Avill, and affection. Such was the virtue of Christ; 
such, in Christ, is the image of the Father. Thus the attri- 
butes of God, through Christ, are revealed with a distinct- 
ness such as most sensibly to influence the mind of man. 
As accountable beings, the knowledge of the moral attributes 
of God is inconceivably more valuable than the knowledge 
of his moral attributes. The knowledge of God made known 
to us in the Old and IN'ew Testaments is to us of the highest 
possible importance. In the inspired oracles all the light of 
nature is confirmed, and in addition to that light there is a 
development of the character of God that affects our condi- 
tion for two worlds. It is not the fact that the Bible reveals 
life and immortality to man, that makes it a gift of the noblest 
value, but it is because God, in oar relation to him, is there 
showMi to us in the threefold office of Father, Redeemer, and 
Sanctifier. It is not because heaven is unveiled resplendent 
in purity and glory, but because a wa}- is shown to us by which 
we may reach heaven. It is not because divine justice is seen 
with sanctions vast as the universe, and law comprehensive 
as God himself, but because an atonement for sin is provided 
which, through faith in the great Mediator, can save unto the 
uttermost those who believe and repent of sin. 

What, then, is the relation Christianity sustains to the 
world, and what its ultimate condition in the world ? Chris- 
tianity, in its origin, nature, power, and success, involves in 
its existence the noblest development of God and his attri- 
butes. It is Christianity that gives peculiar brightness, as 



534 HISTORIC OUTLINE OF THE 

well as distinctness, to the moral character of God. Let us, 
then, consider the relation Christianity sustains to the world, 
and its ultimate condition in the world. Christianity and 
the world Ivini^f in sin are antas^onistic forces. The one is 
natural, the other supernatural ; the one is temporal, the 
other spiritual. IIow, then, is Christianity to exist in the 
world ? It can only exist by the subjugation to itself of 
the world. Two powers so opposite in their nature can 
never coalesce. Does not the prophetic history of the 
four kingdoms of the earth coming in contact with the lifth 
kingdom of the stone, reveal this? How can two forces 
so opposite in their character and manifestation unite? 

The relation, then, Christianity sustains to the world must 
l)e the relation of hostility to the development of all sin. But 
sin develops itself in the individual and collectively in the na- 
tion. It is revealed in the person, and in the mass the aggre- 
gate of persons. Its action is twofold, forgetfulness of God 
and evil toward man; the heart wrong with the Deit}^ and 
wrong with our fellow-men. The external development of sin 
toward God is shown in fiilse relisrions and no relisrion, in 
superstition and infidelity. The former includes the endless 
forms of delusion by which the conscience is bound, the 
liberty of the soul encroached upon, and the open vices of 
impurity, cruelty, and religious slavery deified. Superstition 
inverts all moral distinctions. It degrades virtues into vices, 
and exalts vices into virtues. But infidelity, in throwing oiF 
the shackles of superstition, throws off also all subordination 
to God. It acknowledges no God to control the life, and to 
whose obedience the heart should submit. Its highest au- 
thority is itself. Its only idol is the uncontrolled gratification 
of its desires. Thus, both superstition and infidelit}^ embody 
those sins that make war directly with the supreme authority 
of God ; both result in man's highest ruin, while each secures 
it in a different way. Superstition undeifies the Creator; 
infidelity deifies the creature. Superstition drags God down 
to the low level of man and even to the beasts that perish; 
infidelity arrogates for man that which only God can have. 
Superstition dwells in low marshes and stagnant pools where 



NEW TESTAMEXT THEOLOGY. 535 

a deadly miasma perpetually ascends; infidelity makes its 
home in frozen regions where all life and vegetation die out. 
Superstition is the nurse of ignorance and sensuality; infi- 
delity of presumption and pride. Superstition enchains the 
reason ; infidelity maddens it. The one reduces human 
nature to abject servility ; the other drives it into senseless 
arrogance. Superstition erects its throne upon the conscience 
blind and brutish; infidelity, upon the conscience conceited 
and foolish. The one refuses to exercise the reason God has 
given to man ; the other refuses to submit the reason where 
alone reason can become reasonable. 

What is especially the development of sin toward man ? 
Sin exists under all those forms of vice toward man that 
conscience so instinctively pronounces to be wrong. Tbus, it 
reveals itself in oppression, in envy, hatred, malice, avarice, 
wastefulness, and all unlawful gratification of the appetites 
and the passions. Must not Christianity, then, be at war 
with all the developments of sin ? Must it not in its influ- 
ence be a spiritual power, creating in man a true recognition 
of God, and a true love to man ? Must it not be an agency 
bringing the world, wherever it exists, into harmony with 
God, and the obedience of virtue ? But its ultimate condi- 
tion in the world can only be known by the revelation of God 
to man. Is the Bible such a revelation? Then the ques- 
tion is settled: admit its truth, — admit that it gives to us a 
higher manifestation of the character of God, his moral 
government, and the purposes of his scheme of redemption 
than the light of nature can or does make known, — admit 
that history confirms its great facts, that Christianity is a 
divine reality, — and at once we must come to the conclu- 
sion that the final triumph of Christianity is certain: just as 
certain as the word of God. 

Let, then, the world roll on, — let, like the raging sea, the 
nations be troubled, — let nature open her storehouse of 
tempests and the elements be confounded together. Yet the 
war shall not be forever. Freedom ^hall not always groan in 
chains, or the altars of superstition be red with blood. Infi- 
delity shall not forever scourge the earth, nor despotism crush 



536 HISTOBIG OUTLINE, ETC. 

the iiations into the dust. God may not constantly be for- 
gotten in his works, nor the creature be deitied at the expense 
of the Creator. The fifth kingdom is to stand forever, its power 
is never to end. The cross must yet triumph over pagan 
hinds, and Christianity reign from pole to pole. Nature is 
yet to reveal with greater loveliness the power of God, and 
earth to smile with the nobler beauty of his wisdom. The 
moral excellence of God is yet to flash with brighter light 
from the sacred page, and God in his goodness is to be made 
known with far more vivid clearness. Xature and revelation 
shall then unite with greater glory their beams of light, and 
both shall speak of the mercy of God to man forever. 

Then with truth, in the significant words of Gilfillan, it 
can be said that "the prophecies of all genuine poets since 
the world began shall have a living fulfillment in the general 
countenance and heart of man. J^or shall the spirit of 
progress and aspiring change be extinct. To meet the new 
discoveries below, and the new stars and constellations flash- 
ing down always from the infinite above, or drawing nearer, 
or becoming brighter in the mystic dance of the heavens, 
men's minds must arise in sympathy and brighten in unison. 
Who shall picture what the state of society, and what the 
progress of human souls, at that astronomical era when the 
Cross shall shine in our southern heaven, and the Lyre shall 
include our polar star amid its burning strings ? Must there 
not then break forth from our orb a voice of song, holier 
than Amphion's, sweeter than all Orphean measures, compar- 
able to that fabled melody by which the spheres were said to 
attune their motions ; comparable say rather to that nobler 
song wherewith when earth, a stranger, first appeared in the 
sky, she was saluted by the morning stars singing together, 
and all the sons of God shouting for joy ?" 



CHAPTEE XXL 

THE DIFFICULTIES OF SKEPTICISM. 

It is wise to inquire of any system of skepticism that dis- 
cards the Bible, what it proposes as a substitute for Christi- 
anity. 

The Bible comes to us embodying a religion of facts, a 
statement not only of principles, but of events, based upon 
the authority of God, with those evidences that invite our 
investigation and challenge our belief It has been seen that 
man as an intellectual and moral being, as possessing con- 
science, reason, and aftections, has certain wants in his na- 
ture, as in his body, that demand their appropriate food. 
Those spiritual wants demand, like the body, that which 
shall satisfy them, that which shall till the vast capacity of 
the human heart, and heal the moral disease that sin has in- 
troduced into the soul. The Bible comes to man professing 
to be a divine remedy, and giving the credentials of its heav- 
enly origin. It consists of two divisions : that which per- 
tains to theology or to belief, and that which is comprehended 
in ethics or practice. It teaches us lirst what we are to 
believe, and then what we are to do. 

What, then, is the relation that the Bible sustains to hu- 
man reason ? Here is the point at which skepticism enters 
upon its diverging road ; here commences the issue between 
infidelity and Christianity. The ground taken in the Bible 
in relation to human reason is simply this : here are certain 
facts in respect to God, his moral government, and a system 
of redemption, and certain facts in relation to man, his 
past, present, and future condition ; and here are the evi- 
dences to show that what the Bible demands as necessary 
to believe and practice are not only true, but have a divine 
sanction. What the Bible demands of human reason is, that 

(537) 



538 THE DIFFICULTIES 

those evidences to show it from God should be carefully ex- 
amined and treated with candor. For this purpose the Bible 
presents its varied kinds of evidence to every facult}^ of the 
mind and every susceptibility of the nature. The question 
it puts to the reason is, Do not these evidences prove the 
Scriptures divine? Can adaptation, prophecy, miracles, the 
truth of Christ's mission from God, be denied? Can its 
moral excellence, its suitableness for the everyday duties of 
life, be questioned? 

The .province of reason, then, is to examine the credentials 
of the Bible, to decide the question of their genuineness, to 
conie to a definite conclusion whether one or all of them do 
not show the Scriptures to be from God. In connection with 
human reason is the conscience, whose duty it is to decide 
upon the right or wrong of things. The fact that the evi- 
dences of the Bible a[)peal to the conscience is a proof of its 
rightness, of its harmony with virtue and all moral excel- 
lence. The only question, then, to decide is, Does not the 
Bible give sufficient evidence to prove it from God? Can 
the reason and the conscience deny the varied arguments to 
prove the Bible from God ? Keraember, every evidence the 
Bible presents to the mind to show it from God must be re- 
ceived or shown false. If the skeptic denies the evidences, 
his reason must be good for that denial; he must show that 
his objections are sufficient to authorize the rejection of the 
Bible. If he cannot thus do, if the evidences are valid to 
prc)ve the Bible the word of God, then the question is settled. 
All that reason has to do is to believe and submit. 

For the reason to sit in judgment upon the facts of revela- 
tion, to object to this or that event or statement on account 
of the incomprehensible, the mysterious, or the difficult con- 
nected with those facts, while the Bible is confessed to be 
from God, shows not merely presumption, but absurdity. 
What is the course the Bible takes with the reason, and the 
relation it sustains to it? It presents the credentials of its 
divine authority, demands their examination by the reason 
and conscience, and then, upon the ground of the validity of 
its claims, requires that its facts should be believed in and 



^ OF SKEPTICISM. 539 

its duties practiced. Is it Dot right tliat God should say 
what he pleases, and reasonable that man, when good evi- 
dence is given, should believe what is said? The question 
is not, Are we to believe in what we cannot understand? but, 
Should not facts recorded in the Bible be believed in, what- 
ever may be the mystery connected with those facts ? Here 
it is that skepticism dissents from a proposition so plain. It 
takes the ground that the reason should decide not only 
upon the evidences of a divine revelation, but upon the facts 
of a divine revelation. It assumes that reason should pass 
judgment upon every Bible foct, and receive or reject every 
recorded fact according as it suits the reason or does not suit 
it. What is the result ? The ground of infallibility is 
shifted at once from revelation to reason. It is not revela- 
tion that is infallible, but reason ; not the facts of the Bible 
that are to be received, but the philosophy of those facts 
that must be inquired into. Instead of reason submitting to 
the standard of the Bible, the Bible must submit to the 
standard of reason. AYhat it approves of is true, what it 
does not approve of is false. What it likes is to be received, 
what it dislikes rejected. Consequently, the only authority 
to be relied upon is the reason. Instead of the Bible being 
a guide to the reason, the reason is a guide to the Bible. It 
is the judge not only of the evidences, but even of the facts, 
of the Bible, and this book before the reason must assume 
the same attitude as any uninspired production. Skepticism, 
commencing with this fundamental error, is compelled, how- 
ever reluctant, into another. 

Human reason being the only infallible authority, and as- 
suming to sit in judgment upon the facts of revelation with 
their philosophy, it follows that evevy man's reason as to 
what should be believed and practiced in the Bible is his 
own exclusive master and sole authority. Thus, after shift- 
ing the infallibility of the Scriptures to human reason, it 
gives no better rule of judgment than the endless diversities 
of every man's reason. Every difference of opinion is right 
if the reason thinks so, and to be believed in if the reason 
assents to it. One nitin rejects this fact because of its mys- 



640 THE DIFFICULTIES 

terj, another that statement on account of its incomprehen- 
sibility. This precept is absurd because it does not suit the 
feelings, and that command of God is unsuitable because of 
its harshness. Thus, instead of the Bible regulating our 
feelings and reason, they must both be called upon to regu- 
late the Bible. It is not enough that the Bible gives evi- 
dences to prove it from God to the reason and the conscience, 
but reason must also decide, even upon recorded facts, what 
are to be received and what rejected. 

Consider, now, the, difficulties skepticism brings upon itself 
when it assumes this standard. By elevating reason above its 
sphere^ it degrades it in its sphere. When reason submits to 
revelation, both move together harmoniously. Reason iinds 
in revelation an infallible guide upon subjects of the deepest 
value to human interests. Revelation conies to reason as a 
friend; it urges it to walk in that way that secures its lasting 
benefit. Thus united in one bond of friendship, reason 
becomes ennobled, it enlarges itself to its glorious teachings, 
and grows wise unto salvation ; but in the other case reason 
becomes of necessity the enemy of revelation. They are at 
issue upon a vital point. Reason demands of revelation that 
which it will not submit to, and revelation demands of reason 
that which it rejects. What is the consequence ? As God's 
word is greater than human reason, so in a drawn battle 
between the two the weaker side must be crushed. Here is 
the issue. The Bible will not go down to the level of the 
reason, and the reason will not come up to the standard of 
the Bible. Revelation will not be the servant of reason, nor 
reason the servant of revelation. Consequently, all the 
blessings of a revelation from God must be lost to the 
reason. What are the benefits skepticism secures by such an 
unnatural warfare ? It is proper that after it presumes to be 
wiser than revelation it should show its superiority by the 
greater blessings it bestows. What are those blessings? 
One is, every man should believe what facts of the Bible he 
thinks best, and perform what duties he pleases. Our reason 
is our only infallible standard, and if it blows every day 
round the compass, we must go with it. Thus does skepti- 



OF SKEPTICISM. 541 

cism force us upon a boundless sea of uncertainty and doubt. 
Reason, throwing, like a mad manner, the chart and compass 
overboard, floats upon the waters at the mercj^ of every gale, 
and exposed to every quicksand and rock. What, then, does 
skepticism gain by making a Lucifer out of reason and 
exalting it into a god ? Having seated itself upon the throne 
of revelation, what good does it secure to reason by thus 
pampering its pride? Here is sin, with its countless evils, in 
the world. Here is conscience, accusing of sin. Here are 
the upbraidings of remorse and the exposure to punishment. 
Let the reason of the skeptic assure us how we may escape 
punishment, avert all evils, and secure our highest welfare in 
this world and the next. But can he do it? Alas! while 
reason rejects the Bible, it has no ark to save us from the 
deluge. Flying from revealed to natural religion, it loses all 
the benefits of the former and secures no certainty in the 
latter. Driven over a wild ocean of doubt, it is tossed by 
evei-y billow, only to be engulfed when hope expires and 
happiness finds an eternal grave. The greatest difficulty of 
skepticism is, it makes no provision for the highest w^ant of 
our nature. That want is, some infallible authority revealing 
facts that shall satisfy the conscience, regulate the affections, 
and guide the reason. Certainly that infallibility cannot lie 
in the reason; for it is liable to error, and subject to endless 
difterences of opinion. K infallibility is to be found any- 
where, it must be in the Bible ; and as such the reason must 
submit to revelation or suft'er the consequences of its rejec- 
tion. ]N'ow, the reason, by presuming to pass judgment upon 
the facts of the Bible, by not contenting itself with the 
evidences, but assuming to admit only such facts as suit the 
mind, leads to the virtual denial of any higher authority 
than its own, and therefore makes itself infallible rather 
than the Scriptures. Thus skepticism denies to man his 
greatest want, that which he needs most deeply, and substi- 
tutes for heaven's light the false fire that but dazzles to mis- 
lead. For certainty it gives doubt, and exchanges the bread 
of eternal life for a scorpion or a stone. Man, feeble, erring, 
sinful, and unhappy, is flattered with a profane idea of his 



542 THE DIFFICULTIES 

godlike reason, and instructed in the art of believing in 
ev^erything else rather than those immutable truths that bear 
upon their face the impress of the Deitj^ Thus skepticism, 
having deprived the reason of its noblest security and best 
friend, sends it, a homeless fugitive, to wander where night 
never ends and toil is forever destitute of hope or joy. 

Consider, also, another great difficulty of skepticism. On 
account of the incomprehensibility of the Bible, or the mys- 
tery of its facts, or their unpleasantness to the feelings, the 
reason rejects revelation and suffers itself to be led alone by 
its own standard. But when it comes to the works of nature, 
when it considers the endless variet}- of the things of earth, 
it encounters that which is equally mysterious or incompre- 
hensible. Reason does not escape from that in nature which 
it linds in the word of God. Here are obstacles as great to 
be surmounted, facts as dark to be explained, and wonders 
as mysterious as meet the mind in revelation. Why does 
not the skeptic take the same liberty with the facts of nature 
that he indulges himself with when he comes to the Bible ? 
Why does not he use the same argument with nature as with 
revelation ? If the incomprehensible in the Bible is to be re- 
jected, why not that in nature? If the skeptic must lower 
revelation down to his standard, why not the works of nature? 
There are other mysterious facts than those found in the Bible. 
The skeptic walks in a world of mystery. The incompre- 
hensible surrounds him wherever he may go, and does he 
think any objection will hold good against revelation that is 
equally valid against nature ? Can he believe in one, and for 
the same reason disbelieve the other? If the reason of the 
skeptic will not reject the facts of nature on account of their 
mystery, why does he presume upon the ground of the in- 
comprehensible to reject the facts of revelation ? 

But there is another difficulty that encounters the skeptic. 
He cannot divorce the ethics of the Bible from its doctrines, 
or its morality from its facts ; they stand or fall together. If 
he receives the one, he must receive the other ; if he practices 
the duties of the Bible, he must believe its facts ; or if from 
the heart he believes the facts, he must practice the duties. 



OF SKEPTICISM. 543 

The reason is obvious. The duties of the Bible grow out of 
the facts and are founded upon them. Repentance rests upon 
the revealed fact of an atonement; love to God, upon his 
personal existence and attributes ; faith, upon the character 
of Christ; and all the virtues enjoined in the Bible, upon 
motives that spring directly from the belief of the mind in 
recorded facts. Thus the ethics and the facts of the Bible 
are so intimately blended that the reason is compelled to 
submit to both, if it is willing to submit to either. Another 
difficulty of skepticism is, that it removes the best standard 
of virtue and the highest incentive to moral excellence, 
w^ithout aiFording any equivalent. What better standard of 
virtue than the precepts of the Bible ? What higher au- 
thority than the word of God, or greater motives to a good 
life than the sanctions of revelation ? What is the authority 
of skepticism ? 

The reply is, reason. But what one reason declares true 
another reason declares false, and what one decides to be vir- 
tuous another contends is vicious. Thus, the reason that 
needs itself a standard to go by is compelled to invent one 
without revelation, which satisfies neither itself nor any 
other reason, ^ov is the reason any better off in telling us 
what we should practice ; having disowned the Bible, it is 
driven to a fabrication of a code of morals without it. But 
here it is at a perfect loss what to do. It certainly enjoins no 
duties so good or so numerous. It cannot improve upon the 
morals of revelation, nor recommend a single virtue not found 
in the word of God. Thus the skeptic's code of morals is as 
poor as Pharaoh's lean kine, and introduces a worse famine in 
moralit}' than ever visited the land of Egypt. But skepticism 
in its duties has no sanctions. The duties of the Bible have 
the authority of God and motives that embrace three worlds. 
Here are sanctions that come with impressive w^eight to the 
mind and address every susceptibility of our nature, — sanc- 
tions wide as the universe, and binding in their obligation 
upon every heart. But what sanctions has the skeptic's code 
of morals? Discarding the facts and duties of the Bible, 
where is the obli^cation to conform to the morals of the infi- 



544 THE DIFFICULTIES 

del? Where, with no revealed will of God, is the binding 
power of the ethics of skepticism ? Thus, when we ask of 
the skeptic what we are to believe and what we are to do, 
we find that our belief must be without certainty, and our 
duty without obligation. 

Finally, skepticism has in it no unity of belief, no harmony 
of sentiment, and no consistency of practice. Of the three 
kinds of skepticism that are comprehended in atheism, pan- 
theism, and deism, where is the unity of one system with 
itself, or the harmony of all three united? Among the end- 
less divisions and subdivisions of these systems, who does not 
know that skeptics are as inconsistent in their theories as in 
their practice, and that, having rejected the infa:llibility of the 
Bible, they suffer as the consequence the endless fallibility 
of themselves ? The atheist believes in no God ; the pan- 
theist confounds God with his works, and calls nature and 
law God ; while the deist believes in a personal God at the 
same time that he denies the Bible as a revelation from 
God. Thus the atheist is at war with the deist, and the 
pantheist at war with both, and while all agree in doing away 
with the Bible, they show the consistency of the brotherhood 
in contending with each other. Every new school of skep- 
tics is opposed to that which preceded it, and no sooner does 
one kind of unbelief die out than another is found to take 
its place. Thus does skepticism, assuming as many colors as 
a rainbow, pass away to return again when there turns up 
anything to favor its pretensions. 

Reason, that submitting to revelation would become enno- 
bled, and grow with the strength of an angel, and be the 
handmaid of virtue, and roam over heaven's fields, and exer- 
cise itself with a seraph's thoughts, and have the joy of God 
and the peace of Christ, by the rejection of the Bible, flutters 
like a wounded bird in the air, or wanders as a homeless 
voyager over an unknown sea of doubt and delusion. 

Thus, when we view every system of skepticism that dis- 
cards revelation, we find that the skeptic, by attempting to 
exalt reason above its sphere, in reality degrades it within its 
sphere. The skeptic, possessing no unity of belief or con- 



OF SKEPTICISM. 545 

sistency of practice, can promise nothing better thaoi the dis- 
quietude of doubt or the blind submission of superstition. 
Having no agreement in himself, and no harmony with 
others, the skeptic carries an element in his heart of wretch- 
edness, that will but increase in strength with every perver- 
sion of reason and abuse of conscience. 

If no other objection could be raised against skepticism 
than its want of all unity and its perpetual disagreement, that 
in itself should be enough for reason to renounce it. But 
when, with this, its danger, its fearful difficulties, and its in- 
utility are taken into the account, how much more powerful 
the motive for a cordial rejection ! 

Well said Eousseau of his infidel brethren, " I have con- 
sulted our philosophers; I have read their books; I have 
examined their opinions. I find them all proud, positive, 
and dogmatic, even in their pretended skepticism, — knowing 
everything and proving nothing. If you count the number 
of them, each one is reduced to himself; they unite but to 
dispute." 

35 



CHAPTER XXII. 

THE UNREASONABLENESS OF SKEPTICISM. 

Man possesses a physical, an intellectual, and a moral na- 
ture ; but it is man's moral nature that peculiarly distinguishes 
him from the brutes, and the elevation of which is the chief 
end of the Bible. Consequently, our physical and intellectual 
condition holds a vastly inferior position in the Bible to the 
moral state of man. It is this which the Bible seeks chiefly 
to benefit, since the highest ruin of sin lies in man's moral 
nature. In what way, then, can man, as a moral being, be 
most benefited by a revelation from God ? Is it by a revela- 
tion exclusively for the intellect, to gratify chiefly the curiosity 
of the mind, or by a revelation that shall more intimately 
adapt itself to the wants of our moral nature? Evidently, 
the latter. The Bible has a far higher end than simply to 
gratify human curiosity. It exalts virtue above mind and 
duty above knowledge. The chief excellence of the Scrip- 
ture consists in its adaptation to man's moral nature. It 
seeks, first of all, to elevate man in the noblest part of his 
being, to make him a partaker of the purity of heaven and 
an associate with holy angels. Such being the great end 
of revelation, let the skeptic tell us what better end the 
Bible could reveal, or what nobler method it could devise of 
securing its end, than it has done. If the skeptic can im- 
prove upon the Bible, let him tell us how he can thus do. 
Would he consult more the interests of man's physical and 
intellectual nature ? would he gratify more the curiosity of 
man in respect to the mode or the reasons of the great facts 
of revelation ? But could this be done unless at the expense 
of our moral nature? Could any wiser course be taken than 
has been done, in respect to the bettering of man's moral 
state ? AYhat better rule of obligation, or more impressive 
(546) 



THE UXEEASONABLENESS OF SKEPTICISM. 547 

sanctions to enforce it, could the skeptic devise, if to him it 
was left to invent a code of morals or a law of duty? The 
skeptic must admit that man's moral nature is superior to his 
intellectual, and that if a revelation is given to benefit man 
it must be chiefly directed to bettering his moral state or 
making him more virtuous and good. Such being the case, 
the intellect must hold an inferior position to the heart, and 
to cultivate virtue rather than mind should be the great end 
of a revelation from God to sinners; and tluis we find it. 
But the very thing which is the chief recommendation of the 
Bible is that which the skeptic most stumbles at. The skeptic 
treats with contempt the Bible because such a fact is difiicult 
to comprehend, or such a doctrine is hard to understand, or 
the reasons for such a statement of truth are not given. In 
one place the Bible is too puerile; in another, too abstruse. 
Here its repetition is objected to, and there its conciseness. 
In one part its simplicity is found fault with ; in another, its 
obscurity. The skeptic complains that his intellect is not 
fully satisfied by the Bible ; that he cannot understand all 
the doctrines or comprehend many of the facts of revelation. 
Suppose this may all be true with the skeptic, what does it 
amount to ? Is the Bible only given for the intellect? Is it 
to gratify simply the curiosity of man that God reveals his 
word ? Is the superior part of man to be neglected in order 
to gratify the mind? Is the intelligence to be worshiped at 
the expense of virtue ? Is knowledge to be preferred to 
duty ? 

It is the glory of the Bible that while it satisfies all the 
just demands of the mind, it yet does not sacrifice the moral 
nature to the intellectual. The skeptic makes this highest 
excellence of the Bible the reason for its rejection. He 
comes to it alone as a book addressed to the mind; he reads 
it as he would read a work upon science and mathematics, 
or a treatise upon philosophy or history. It does not enter 
his mind that, superior as may be its intellectual merit, its 
chief excellence consists in the fact that it consults infinitely 
more the moral state of man than his mental condition ; that 
to renew the heart and life is vastly more its object than to 



548 THE UNREASONABLENESS 

impart knowledge. Such being the end of revelation, how 
unreasonable are the objections of the skeptic ! This is 
more evident when w^e consider that the real difficult}^ lies 
not in the mind of the skeptic, but in his heart. The Bible 
reveals enough for all practical purposes, and is clear enough 
for all duty. 

There is nothing in the Bible that the reason can suitably 
object to, and nothing that is unfriendly to the highest exer- 
cise of the mind. It forbids no investigation, nor disapproves 
of any proper exercise of the intellect. Why, then, does the 
skeptic object to the Bible? He cannot devise any better 
remedy for sin, any nobler inducements to virtue, any higher 
rewards for goodness ; he cannot show a safer road to heaven, 
or a clearer path to happiness ; he cannot say that we ought 
not to love God with our whole heart, or that we should not 
obey his law, or believe upon Christ his Son, or repent of 
sin, or perform every duty that conscience responds to in 
revelation. Why, then, does the skeptic continue objecting 
to the Bible? Does the reason lie so much in the mind as 
in the heart? In all moral duties what we dislike we uni- 
formly misrepresent; and this is precisely the condition of 
the skeptic. He misrepresents the facts of the Bible because 
he dislikes the duties of the Bible; he makes a stumbling- 
block of his intellect because his heart is wrong. Can any- 
thing be more unreasonable ? The Bible presents itself em- 
bodying every duty needful for practice, and every fact 
essential for belief. It demands a reception from motives 
addressed to our highest interests for two worlds ; it comes 
to secure for us our noblest welfare in all that relates to body 
and soul. Its great end is to make us wiser, better, and 
happier, to impart a salvation such as God alone can give and 
alone can fully comprehend. 

Under such circumstances, does not the difficulty of the 
skeptic rest rather upon a wrong state of heart than of mind? 
So long as his objections lead him to the rejection of the 
Bible, can he practice its duties ? Can he obey the precepts of 
the Bible while he disbelieves its doctrines ? Can he be a 
^over of its morality while he is uninfluenced by its sanctions? 



OF SKEPTICISM. 549 

If he considers the Bible unwortliy the belief of the mind, 
is it strange that he should deny it the love of the heart? 

The unreasonableness of the skeptic is also seen in that he 
cannot prove false the great facts of the Bible, even were 
they not made known in the Bible. Those facts may be 
divided into two classes: truths to be believed in, and duties 
to practice. Let us look at the first class of facts. Consider 
the two states of future happiness and future misery. Can 
the skeptic prove these facts untrue, even if not revealed in 
the Bible ? Can reason show them impossible, even if not a 
word had been written in respect to those two states of exist- 
ence? The Bible did not invent these separate states of 
being. The Bible records them as facts, but it had nothing 
to do with the making of them. Their existence would have 
been equally as true had no information been imparted in 
respect to their reality. The Bible acts the part of a chart 
that reveals to the mariner the port of safety and the rocks 
that endanger the vessel; but is that to be considered a defect 
which with one hand points out our ruin, and the other our 
security ? 

Consider also the character of God, who is revealed as our 
moral Governor, a Being of infinite perfection, immutable 
in his purposes, alike omnipresent in his existence and om- 
niscient in his knowledge. But the character of God was 
the same before the Bible was written as since. His moral 
government possessed, millions of ages ago, the same ele- 
ments of durability, of certainty, of wisdom, of goodness, 
and of strength, that they now have. 

If, again, we consider the facts in respect to the threefold 
existence of God, the divine atonement of Christ, and the 
operations of the Eternal Spirit, we arrive at the same con- 
clusion. The Bible makes known truths that would be 
equall}^ realities even if not recorded upon the inspired 
page. Consider also the second class of truths that com- 
prehend the duties of the Bible. The truths that are com- 
prised in the great law of moral obligation, which the reason 
and conscience declare as right and suitable for man, which 
speak of human liberty and human responsibility, which re- 



650 THE U.yREASONABLENESS 

gard man as a moral and accountable being, which point to 
reward and punishment for human conduct, would not be 
less true even if there was no revelation from God. Our 
liberty and our responsibility commenced with our moral 
agency. The great law of obligation that binds us to the 
service of God, that imposes upon us duties to our Creator 
and to man, that treats us as endowed with conscience to 
discriminate right from wrong, and with liberty to act as free 
agents, did not owe its origin to the Bible. This is a fact 
that revelation raake^ clearer, but can never' create. It is 
as indestructible as our own existence, as permanent as our 
moral nature, and as certain as God himself. 

In our infidelity we may cheat ourselves into the belief that 
man is compelled by necessity as absolute as that of a machine 
to act always as he does act, — or we may, with the pantheist, 
confound God with nature and make man a part of God, a 
strict emanation of his essential being, and thus by a different 
road arrive at the same negation of moral obligation as the 
advocate of necessity, — or, with the mystic, we may contend 
that we are only the passive recipients of influences which we 
can neither avert nor control, — or, with the skeptic, we may 
deny the certainty of all knowledge and attempt to destroy 
the foundation of all human belief, and thus equally with the 
advocate of necessity, the pantheist, and the mystic, aim to 
make false or useless the law of obligation, and seek to absolve 
man from his highest duty, — and yet the law of obligation 
would still remain, the eternal principle of right and wrong 
would be unaffected. God's government would be as immu- 
table as before, and conscience, true to its high origin, would 
give its verdict in favor of divine justice and the rightful 
claim of God upon the obedience of the heart. Thus, let the 
mind cover itself with sophistry, — let the reason try ever so 
hard to prove false to itself, — let the heart, impatient of good 
restraint, treat the Bible as a fable, and obey no other voice 
than that of passion or of selfishness, — and yet, amid the 
ever-changing forms of error, or tossed ever so madly upon 
the sea of delusion, there still would rest upon the soul the 
same undeviating law of duty, and the same eternal account- 



OF SKEPTICISM. 551 

ability to God. Thus, Bible or no Bible, human responsi- 
bility with human liberty would go together, and duty and 
virtue would ever remain to bind man to his Maker and 
his fellow-man. How unreasonable, then, to find fault with 
the facts of revelation, which only reveal more clearly the 
truths of nature ! 

The unreasonableness of skepticism is also seen in that 
the most it can pretend to is that it is a system of doubt, and 
not of evidence. The skeptic doubts the facts of the Bible, — 
he doubts its truth, its divine origin, its harmony, its excel- 
lence and proffered remedy for sin ; but he cannot give good 
reasons for his doubts, — he cannot offer any proof to convince 
the mind of the validity of his doubts, — he cannot show evi- 
dence that he is right and that all who believe the Bible are 
wrong. The most he can do is to work his own mind into 
error or plunge deeper into self-delusion ; he may consider 
himself as an irresponsible being, or his soul as mortal as his 
body, or his only duty to live in obedience to passion or 
selfishness, — he may consider as visionary God's law, and 
unreal the claims of his moral government, — he may look 
upon Christianity as an imposture, and the atonement of 
Christ as a delusion, — he may imagine himself absolved from 
ever}' dut}' of Christianity, — he ma^^ doubt the existence even 
of God, or confound his personality with nature, — he may 
acknowledge no higher law than his own pleasure, and deride 
any idea of a judgment to come, — and yet his doubts are 
doubts without proof, — doubts that conscience disowns, ajid 
which reason, if true to itself, declares baseless, — doubts that 
can bear no investigation, and which vanish as darkness before 
the sunlight of truth. If the skeptic could only offer some- 
thing better than doubt, — if his objections could be proved or 
his infidelity shown reasonable, — the case would be different. 
It would be another thing if he could give some substitute 
for what he rejects, or make peaceful that heart whose faith 
he has destroyed ; but when for confidence he gives distrust, 
and for hope despair, — when he destroys the noblest security 
of man, and brings midnight over his brightest prospects, — it 
is then that skepticism is seen to be no less deplorable in its 
delusion than miserable in its end. 



552 THE UNBEASONABLENESS 

The unreasonableness of the skeptic is seen in the war he 
institutes with his conscience and moral nature. There is 
that in man that calls loudly for a religious faith. There 
is a perceived want in our nature that must have something 
to satisfy it. Man restlessly turns away from a chaos of 
doubt. Doubt itself is a ceaseless source of trouble; it is 
foreign to all peace of mind and all true happiness. The 
doubter feels himself miserable ; he finds in his own heart 
an unending source of disquietude. To be ever doubting 
and never coming to the knowledge of the truth is the very 
life of skepticism. As such, it must be at war with con- 
science and the moral nature. Both demand some foundation 
to rest upon. They are not content to be at the mercy of 
every idle wind of error or the sport of every shifting cur- 
rent. With human liberty there awakens in the mind a 
sense of accountability ever coextensive with the perception 
of freedom. Conscience speaks of right and wrong, of duty 
to God and man. !N"o sophistry can stifle the war we wage 
with our highest welfare for two worlds. 

As right belief is intimately associated with right practice, 
so we must believe the Bible, or we cannot practice its duties. 
We must have ftiith in its doctrines, or we never will obey its 
precepts. The skeptic who gives himself up to doubt must, 
if the Bible is true, be at war with himself; he enters into a 
controversy with his own nature, where his endless doubts 
allow him neither stability nor safety. 

If the skeptic realizes his situation, he must be unhappy; 
his nature demands some foundation for his doubts, and he 
cannot show it; his reason demands some evidence of his 
unbelief, and he is unable to give it ; his conscience impor- 
tunes him to obey the truth, and he refuses to listen to its 
voice. Thus does the skeptic raise in his own heart a strife 
that must last as long as his doubts ; he carries about in his 
own heart a judge that will, whenever interrogated, decide 
against him. The evil of the skeptic is not that he doubts 
because sufficient evidence is not given for the facts of the 
Bible, but because all evidence is not given ; his unbelief 
rests not upon reason, but upon the want of it. 



OF SKEPTICISM. 553 

Does the skeptic consider how finite must be his mind, 
how limited the range of his observation ? Does he consider 
that every day he believes in what passes about him, upon 
the slightest evidence, while he rejects the Bible upon the 
greatest ? Does he think upon the limitation of his knowl- 
edge and the infinitude of that universe that opens up to his 
inspection ? Is the skeptic aware how wide the space that 
exists between him and God, how measureless the distance 
between the creature and the Creator ? Does he feel, as he 
should feel, w^iat interests he endangers by the rejection of 
the Bible ? Can he realize the magnitude of his loss with 
no faith ? Living, as he does, an unbeliver, does he think 
where unbelief will land him ? When he thinks of death 
and what lies beyond, is it a matter of indifierence how poor 
may be the hopes and how uncertain the foundation where 
rest the feet ? 

Does the skeptic imagine his doubts can benefit him when 
reason is shipwrecked and conscience abused ? Is he confi- 
dent of safety while neglecting his Bible and throwing con- 
tempt upon all its provisions of mercy? Does the skeptic 
think his unbelief will not injure him, while it is at war with 
reason and conscience and can live only by the rejection of 
the Bible ? If he feels himself accountable, should he not 
fear for duty neglected, truth not believed in, God disre- 
garded, Christ unsubmitted to, heaven uncared for, an im- 
mortality of glory unsought, and the soul wandering reckless 
over a sea of doubt and never coming to the knowledge of 
the truth ? 



INDEX TO AUTHORS, 



(555) 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 



The Theological Index, or References to Works in all Depart- 
ments of Religious Literature, by Howard Malcom, D.D., LL.D., is 
a most thorough and exhaustive work, and will be found indis- 
pensable to those who may wish to enter into an extended investiga- 
tion of any of the subjects that come under the head of natural or 
revealed theology. 

The present index is exclusively taken from that of Dr. Malcom, 
and is designed to assist those who may not be in possession of his 
valuable work. Only a small proportion of the authors who have 
written upon the different subjects suggested under natural and 
revealed theology are here referred to ; but my object has been, as 
far as possible, to secure such a list as may be most desired by the 
general reader and best adapted for the object aimed at in the 
preparation of my book. 



NATURAL THEOLOGY. 



EFFICIENT CAUSATION AND FINAL CAUSATION. 



American Biblical Kepository. 2d 
Series. 2:381. 3:174. 4:217,467. 

Boyle's (Hon. Kob.) "Works. 

Brown's Philosophy of the Mind. 

Buchanan's Modern Atheism. 

Fraser's Magazine. 16 : 254. (Final 
Causes. ) 

Hume's (David) Essays. 

Irons's Doct. of Final Causes. (Admi- 
rable.) 



Mill's Exam, of Sir W. Hamilton's 
Philos. 

Philosophy of Necessity. 

Miller's Old Ked Sandstone. (Final 
Causes.) 

Miiller's Christian Doct. of Sin. 

Scott's Limits of Metaphysical Sci- 
ence. 

Travis (Henry) on Moral Freedom. 

Whish on the First Cause. 

Woods (Dr.) on Cause and Effect. 



GENERAL LAWS OF THE EARTH AND THE SUN. 

Bridgewater Treatises. i Buchanan's (James) Lectures. 

Cobb's Bampton Lectures. 1783. I Kawlinson's Bampton Lectures. 1839. 

(557) 



558 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 



DEVELOPMENT THEORY. 



Brongniart, Tableau des Genres de 

Vegetaux, Fossiles, etc. 
Lamarck, Hist, des Animaux sans 

Vertebres. 
Maillet, Philosophic. 
Atkinson's (H. G-.) Letters. 
Darwin's Zoonomia. 
Huxley's (Prof. T. H.) Works 
Spencer's (Herbert) Illustrations of 

Universal Progress. 



Agassiz's Study of Natural History. 
Brodie's (Sir Bcnj.) Lectures. 
Christian Examiner. NewSeries. 1:60. 
Lubbock's Lectures on the Origin of 

Man. 
Lyell's Antiquity of Man. 
Stillingfleet's Originos Sacrae. 
Walker's (Jas. B.) Sacred Philoso- 



LIFE AND INSTINCT. 



Bingley's Animal Biography.. 

Brougham's (Lord) Dissertations. 

Brown's Biog. Sketches of Quadru- 
peds. 

Buffon's Natural History. 

Bushnan's Philosophy of Instinct. 

Couch's Illustrations of Instinct. 

French's True Nature of Instinct. 

Good's (J. M.) Book of Nature. 

Hancock's Phys. and Moral Relations 
of Instinct 

Jarrold on Instinct and Reason. 

Kemp (T. L ) on Instinct. 

Kirby's Bridge water Treatise (the 
7th). 

THE HUMAN BODY AND MIND, AND THE TESTIMONY OF HISTORY AND 
SCIENCE UPON THE ORIGIN OF MAN. 



Law (T.) on Instinctive Impulses. 

Second Thoughts on do. 

Morris's Records of Animal Saga- 
city. 

Mower on the Nature of Instinct. 

Paine's (Dr ) Soul Distinct from Mat- 
ter. 

Paley's Natural Theology. 

Ramsay (Sir Geo.) on Instinct and 
Reason. 

Swainson's Habits of Animals. 

Wakefield's Instinct Displayed. 

Ware's Philosophy of Natural His- 
tory. 



Du Moulin, Hist des Races humaines. 
Ed ward, Des Caracteres physiologiques 

des Races humaines. 
Lacepfede, Histoire naturelle de 

I'Homme 

Les Ages de la Nature. 

Pauw, (Euvres philosophiques. 
Yirey, Hist, naturelle du Genre hu- 

maine. 
Amor. Biblical Repos. 2d Series*. 11: 

274. 
Brit. Quarterly Rev. 1 : 337. 
Democratic Rev. 2G : 227. 27 : 41, 138. 
Dunbar's History of Mankind in 

Rude and in Cultivated Ages. 
Eraser's Magazine. 30 : 537 44 : 651. 
Guyot's Ear^th and Man. Tr. by Fel- 

ton. 
Home's (Lord Kames) Sketches. 
Jones's Origin of Difiierences of Color, 

etc. 
Latham's Nat. Hist, of the Varieties 

of Man. 

Man and his Migrations. 

Lawrence's Lectures. (Able.) 
Littell's Living Age 24 : 490. 20 : 323. 
Lond. Quart Rev. 1:328 86:1. 



Methodist Quart. Rev. 4 : 255 10 : 531. 

Mudie's (Robt.) Works. Vol. 3. 

Murray's (Jas.) Creation, and the De- 
sign of the Mosaic History. 

Princeton Review. 21:150. 22:603, 
313. 

Prichard's Phy.sical History of Man- 
kind (Modifying Inf. of Phy.sical 
and Moral Causes, etc. 1836 Greatly 
improved in 1855 162 engravings.) 

Schoolcraft's Notes on the Iroquois. 

Smith's (Sam. S.) Causes of Difference 
in Color. 

Smith's (C. H.) Nat. Hist, of the Spe- 
cies. (With an introduction, con- 
taining the views of Blumenbach, 
Prichard, Bachman, Agassiz, etc.) 

Van Amrige's Natural History of 
Man. (Reviews Lawrence, Prich- 
ard, and others.) 

Ward's (S H.) Nat. Historv of Man. 
(Plates.) 

Westminster Review. 14: 17. 20 : 186. 
55 : 83. 

Young (J R.) on Modern Skepticism. 
1865. (Reviews Lyell, Huxley, Co- 
lenso, etc.) 



INDEX TO AUTHOBS. 



559 



CHANCE AND FATE. 



Buchanan 's Modern Atheism. Chap. 6. 
Bentley's Boyle Lectures. 1693. 
Clarke (Dr. Sam.) on the Laws of 

Chance. 
Hoj-le's Essay on the Doctrine of 

Chances. 
Howe's (Charles) Meditations. 
Watt's Ontology. 
Arpe, Theatro Fati. 



Buchanan's Modern Atheism. 

Comte's Positive Philosophy. 

Positive Politics. 

Positive Catechism. 

Cudworth's Intellectual System. Ch.l. 

Toplady on the "Pate" of the An- 
cients. 
See a great list of foreign writers in 

Arpe, above named. 



NATURAL THEOLOGY. 



Bullet, Exist, de Dieu demontree. 

Curcellii Opera. Lib. I. cap. 2. 

Delalle, Theologie naturelle. 

Doederieini Theologia. 

Gerhard! Loci Theologici. 

Lesser, Theologie des Insectes. 

NahmmacherdeXat.Theol.Ciceronis. 

Sabunde, Theologia Naturalis. 

Vitringse Opuscula. 

Wild's Yernunftglaube. 

Abbadie on the Christian Eeligion. 

Abernethy's (John) Sermons. 

Allen's Oracles of Reason. 

Anderson's Course of Creation. 

Atkey's Being and Attributes of God. 

Barker's Natural Theology. 

Barrow's (Bp.) Works. 

Beavan's Elements of Xatural The- 
ology. 

Bellamj''s (Joseph) Sermons. 

Bentlev's Bovle Lectures. 1692. 

Biblioth. Sacra. 3:241. 

Berkeley's Minute Philosopher. 

Boyle on Final Causes. 

Bridgewater Treatises, viz.: 
Bell's Mechanism of the Hand. 
Buckland's Geology with Reference 
to Theology. (This author ex- 
pended on the 90 plates the whole 
of the thousand pounds received 
from the Bridgewater fund.) 
Chalmers on the Power, Wisdom, 
and Goodness of God, as seen in 
the Adaptation of External Na- 
ture to the Moral and Intellectual 
Constitution of Man. 
Kidd on the Adaptation of Nature 
to the Physical Condition of Man. 
Kirby's AVisdom of God, as seen in 
the History, Habits, and Instincts 
of Animals. 
Front's Chemistry, Meteorol., and 

Digestion. 
Roger's Animal and Vegetable 
Physiology. 



Whewell's Astronomy and General 
Physics. 

Brit. Quar. Review. 7:204. 

Brougham's Natural Theology. 

Brown's Existence of a Supreme Cre- 
ator. 

Burnett's (C. M.) Power, etc., as seen 
in the Animal Creation. (Capital.) 

Bushnan's Study of Nature. 

Butler's Analogy of Religion and Na- 
ture. 

Charnock's Works. 
I Christ. Exam. 30:273.6:389. 13:187. 
i Christian Quar. Spect. 8:177. 10:319. 

Christian Review. 3 : 1. 

Crabbe's (Geo.) System of Natural 
Theology. 

Crombie's Natural Theology. 

Dick's Christian Philosopher. 

Dryden (J.) on Natural Religion. 

Durham's Boyle Lectures. 1711, 1712. 

Astro- Theolo2:v. 

Dublin Univ. Mag"! 6 : 448. 7 : 597. 

Eclectic Rev. 4th series. 5 : 609. 

Edinb. Rev. 1:287. 64:141. 

Fergus's Testimonv of Nature. 

Eraser's Mag. 12 : 375. 13 : 694. 

Gisbourne's Test, of Nat. Theol. to 
Religion. 

Gosse's Life in its Manifestations. 

Gretton's Review of the Argument 
a priori for the Being of God. 

Grew's (N.) Cosmologia Sacra. 

Grintield's Conn, of Nat. and Rev. 
i Theology. 

I Grove's (N.) Wisdom of Deitv. 
I Hall's (Robt.) Modern Infidelity. 
; Hamilton on the Supreme Being. 

Hampden's Philos. Evid. of Christi- 
anity. 

Harris's (Robert) Sermons. 

Hey 's ( John ) Lectures. Bk. 1 , ch. 3 & 4. 

Jones's Natural Evidences of Christi- 
anity. 

Laws"s (E.) Theory of Religion. 



560 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 



Leibnitz's Ttieodice. 
Leighton's (Abp.) Lectures. 
Le.^ser's Insecto-Theology. 
Leuwenhoeck's "Works. Trans, by S. 

Hoole. 
Littell's Living Age. 19 : 289. 
Lowman's Unity and Perfections of 

God. 
McCosh's Typical Forms and Special 

Ends in Creation. 

■ On Intuitions. 

Divine Gov., Physical and Moral. 

McCuUock's Proofs and Illustrations, 

etc. 
Miller's (Hugh) Works. 
Milne on the State of the Old World. 
Month. Rev. 88:82. 120:30. 
New Eng. Mag. 4: 454. 
New York Rev. 1 : 137, 298. 
Nieuwentyt's Religious Philosopher. 
North Am. Rev. 42 : 467. 54 : 102, 

256. 
OUvfFe on the Origin and Government 

of the World. 



Paley's Natural Theology. 

Ragg's Creation's Testimony to its 
God. 

Rav's Physico-Theology. 

Read's (H.) Palace of the Great King. 

Rust's (Bp.) Use of Reason. 

Seaton's Grounds of Religion. 

Spalding (J. J.) on Religion. 

Stebbing's Defence of Dr. Clark. 

Steere's (Edw.) Exist, and Attributes 
of God. 

Sykes's Foundation of Religion. 

Thompson's Christian Theism. 

Towne's Actonian. (A prize essay.) 

Tullock's Theism. (A prize essay.) 

Tunstall's (James) Academica. 

Turretin's (Francis) Dissertations. 
Diss. 1. 

Turton's Natural Theology, consid- 
ered with reference to Lord Brou- 
gham's discourse. 

Westminster Review. 17 : 413. 

Wilson's (Professor) Chemical Final 
Causes. 



THE PROBLEM OF PHYSICAL AND MORAL EVIL. 



Beausobre, Hist, de Manichseisme. L 

v. c. 1. 
Bilfinger de Origine Mali praecipue 

moralis. 
Buddei Miscellan. Sacrorum. Pars 

III. 
Calvin de Peccato originale. 
Chenevierc, du Peche originel. 
Disputatio de Orig. Peccato inter 

Flacium et Strigel. 1560. 
Haberkornii (Pet.) Dissertationes. 
Junii (Francisc.) Dissertationes. 
Leibnitz, Essais de Theodicse. 
Martinus de Causa Peccati. 
Matthfeus de Origine Mali. 
Scharfii Disputationes Apologeticse. 
Strangius de Voluntate Dei. 
Thumii (Theod.) Dissertationes. 
Tilene, de la Cause et de I'Origine du 

Peche. 
Am. Bibl. Repos. 2d series, 8 : 314. 

10 : 353. 
Am. Quart. Register. 15: 113. 
Balguy on Divine Rectitude. 
Bayles's Origin of Evil. 
Bays on Divine Benevolence. 
Bellamy's (Joseph) Sermons. 
Bennet on the Cause of Evil. 
Biblioth. Sac. 7:254,479. 
Brougham's (Lord) Dissertations on 

Natural Theology. Diss. 3. 
Butterworth on Moral Government. 
Casaubon's Origin of Temporal Evil. 



Chalmers's Natural Theology. (On the 
theory of Leibnitz.) 

Christian Disciple. 1 : 300. 

Christian Exam 33 : 169. 

Christian Rev. 7 : 520. 8 : 7. 

Christmas's Sin; its Causes and Con- 
sequences. 

Cudworth's Intellectual System of the 
Universe. 

Clarke's (John) Bovle Lectures. 
1719, 1720. 

D'Oyley's (George) Dissertations. 
Diss. 1. 

Duncan's (John) Philos. of Human 
Nature. 

Edwards (Pres.) on the Will. Part IV. 

Dissertation on Liberty and Ne- 
cessity. 

Fenelon's Philosophical Works. 

Ferguson's Principles of Moral Sci- 
ence. 

Fleming's Necessity not the Origin 
of Evil. 

Foster's (Dr. James) Sermons. 

Gales 's Court of the Gentiles. Part 
lY. Bk. 3. 

Gilbert's (Jos.) Reply to Bennet. 

Glanvil's Lux Orientalis. 

Grove on the Wisdom of God. 

Hussey's (Christopher) Sermons. 

Jeffrey's (John) Sermons. 

Jenvns's (Soame) Enq. into the Origin 
of Evil. 



INDEX TO AUTHORS, 



661 



Johnson's (Dr. S.) Rev. of S. J.'s En- 
quiry. 

King's (Abp.) Origin of Evil. 

Law (E.) on the Origin of Evil. 

Lovett's Cause of Evil, Physical and 
Moral. 

Miiller's Christian Doctrine of Sin. 

New Englander. 1 : 110. 

Placette's Refutation of Bayle. 

Priestley's Disquisitions. 

Princeton Review. 14 : 529. 

Shepherd's Nature and Origin of Evil. 

Smith's (John Pye) Sermons. 

Squiers's Problem Solved. (Not 
quite.) 



Stillingfleet's Origines Sacrae. Bk. 3. 
ch. 3. 

Todd's (H. J.) Declarations of the Re- 
formers. 

Universalist Quarterly. 4 : 221. 

West on Moral Agency. 

Williams's Hypothesis Respecting, 
etc. 

Vindication of do. 

Young's Evil not from God. (One of 
the last and best. ) 
A good key to the controversy on 

this subject may be found in Chis- 

sold's Connection of Theology, Psycho- 
logy, and Physiology. 



LIGHT OF NATURE. 



Chauvin de Religione Naturali. 
Creutzer de Leibnitii Doctrina. 
Diogenes Laertius de Vitis Philoso- 

phorum. 
Grotius do Veritate. 
Hammii Scrutatio Principii primi. 
Hansennii (Petr.) Meditationes. 
Mori (Henr.) Demonstrationes. 

Enchiridion Ethicum. 

Pfhanner, Systema Theologiae Gen- 

tilis. 
Platonis Opera. (De Rebus divinis, 

etc.) 
Plutarchi Moralia. 
Poiretus de Deo. 
Proclus de Theologia Platonica. 
Puftendorf de Officiis Hominis et Ci- 

vis. 
Reimar's (H. S.) Naturalische Reli- 
gion. 
Simon (Jules) Religion naturelle. 
Velthusii de Cultu naturali. 
VossiusdePhilosophia et Philos. Sec- 

tis. 

de Theologia Gentili. 

W^alch's (C. W^.E.) Natiirlichen Got- 

tesgelehrtheit. 
Wolfii Theologia Naturalis. 
Abernethy's (John) Sermons. 
Barr's Summary of Natural Religion. 
Bates's (William) Works. 
Baxter's (Andrew) Matho. 
Blackwell's (Thos.) Sacred Scheme. 
Bourn's (Samuel) Sermons. 
Bovle Lectures for 1692, 1695, 1704, 

1713, 1717, 1721, 1747, 1766, 1778, 

1808, 1847. 
Boyle (Robt.) on the Veneration due 

to God. 
Broughton's Christianity Distinct 

from the Religion of Nature. 



Brown's Natural and Revealed Reli- 
gion. Bk. 1. 

Bulklcy (C.) on Natural Religion. 

Bushnan's In trod, to the Study of 
Nature. 

Calamy on the Light of Nature. 

Charnock (Stephen) on Providence. 

Cheyne's Philos. Principles of Reli- 
gion. 

Christian Examiner. 52:117. 

Christian Monthly Spectator. 4 : 249. 
3:85. 

Clarice's (S.) Boyle Lectures. 1704. 

Conybeare's Defence of Revealed Re- 
ligion. 

Culverwell on the Light of Nature. 

Cumberland's Laws of Nature. 

Dick's Philosophy of Religion. 

Dryden (J.) on Natural Religion. 

Duncan's (J. S.) Botano-Theology. 

Duncan's (H.) Sacred Philosophy. 

Durham's Astro-Theology. 

Physico-Theology. 

Edwards on the Causes of Atheism. 

Ellis on the Knowledge of Divine 
Things. 

Erbury's Confutation of Deism. 

Fiddes's Theologia Speculativa. 

Poster's (James) Discourses on Social 
Virtue. 

Gardner's (James) Sermons. 

Gastrell on Natural Religion. 

Gerard's Evidences of Nat. and Rev. 
Religion. 

Glover's (P.) Tracts. 

Greenfield's Connection of Nat. and 
Rev. Religion. 

Hale's (Chief Justice) K lowledgo of 
God. 

Hallet's Future State n t prove^ by 
the Light of Nature. 



36 



562 



INDEX TO AUTHOBS. 



Halyburton's Insufficiency of Natural 
Religion. 

Harris's Eight Sermons on the Being 
of God. 

Hey's (Dr. John) Lectures. 

Hume's Dialogues on Natural Reli- 
gion. 

Jack's Mathematical Theology. 

Karnes (Lord) on Natural Religion. 

Law's (W.) Theory of Religion. 

Mackay's Progress of the Intellect. 

Mole's Obligations of Natural Reli- 
gion. 

Morehead's Dialogues. 

Nye on Natural and Revealed Reli- 
gion. 

Orr's (J.) Theory of Religion. 

Parker's Defence of Natural and Re- 
vealed Religion. 

Peabody's (A. P.) Lowell Institute 
Lectures. 1864. 

Ramsay's Principles of Religion. 

Scott's Christian Life. Part II. 

Sherlock on Providence. 

Simon on Nat. Religion. Trans, by 
Marsden. 

Squiers's Natural and Revealed Reli- 
gion. 

Stanley's Lives of the Philosophers. 

Stillingfleet's Origines Sacrae. 



Sturm's Reflections on the Works of 
God. 

Stuynoe's Salvation by Christ Alone. 

Sykes's Connection of Nat. and Rev. 
Religion. 

Taylor's (Jer.) Ductor Dubitantium. 

Necessity of Faith in Christ. 

Tenison against Hobbes. 

Totham's Scale of Truth. 

Tucker's Light of Nature Pursued. 
(Profound and clear. First pub- 
lished under the name of Edward 
Search.) 

Tunstall's Natural and Revealed Reli- 
gion. 

Twell's Vindic. of the Gospel of Mat- 
thew. 

Ty tier's Essays on Important Sub- 
jects. 

Watson's Popular Evidences of Nat. 
Religion. 

Watts's (Isaac) Berry Street Sermons. 

Wayland's Elements of Moral Sci- 
ence. 

Whiston's Astronomical Principles of 
Religion. 

Willatts on the Religion of Nature. 

Wilson's (Jos.) Letters on Religion. 
(A good introduction to Butler's 
Analogy.) 



LIMITATIONS OP HUMAN THOUGHT. 



Aborcrombie's Intellectual Powers. 

Baker's Reflections upon Learning. 

Balguy's (John) Discourses. 

Bourn's (Samuel) Sermons. 

Boyle's Use of Reason in Religion. 

Brown's Procedure and Extent of the 
Human Understanding. 

[Calamy (Ed.)] Philologus's Use and 
Abuse of Reason. 

Campbell (Abp.) on the Necessity of 
Revelation. 

Clark's (John) Office of Reason in Re- 
ligion. 

Croft's Bampton Lectures. 1786. 

Curry's Confirmation of Faith. 

Davies's (J.) Estimate of the Human 
Mind. 

Eclectic Review. 1859 : 225. 

Ellis's Knowledge of Divine Things. 

Ferguson's Interest of Reason in Re- 
ligion. 

Gale's Court of the Gentiles. Part III. 

Gilderdale on Natural Religion. 

Glanvill's Vanity of Dogmatizing. 

Holden's (Lawrence) Sermons. 

Letters between Ant. Tuckey and B. 
Which cot. 

Manning's (James) Sermons. 



^^Linningham's Use of Speculative 

Philosophy in Religion. 
Mansc'l's Bampton Lectures. 1858. 
Nelson's (G.) Use of Human Reason. 
Newton's (Bp.) Dissertations. 
Norris's Mysteries of Christianity. 
Princeton Review. 32 : 648. 
Rust on the Use of Reason. 
Sharp's (Abp.) Sermons. 
Smith's True Method of Obtaining 

Divine Knowledge. 
Stephen's Human Nature Delineated. 
Stone's (Edward) Sermons. 
Tuckey's Letters. 

Twinning's Reason in Regard to Reve- 
lation. 
Van Mildcrt's Boyle Lectures. 1802. 
Wardlaw's Christian Ethics. 
Whately's (Bp.) Sermons. 
Whichcot's Aphorisms in Religion. 
Whiston's Reason and Philos. no 

Enemies. 
Witsius on the Abuse of Reason. 
Worseley's P. of Reason in Religion, 

deduced from the Sermon on the 

Mount. 
Young's Province of Reason. (An 

able criticism on Mansell.) 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 



563 



ATHEISM. 



Adams on the Existence of God. 

Alexander's (J.) Observations. (Ag. 
Hobbes.) 

Allen's Oracles of Eeason. 

Allen's (Thomas) Modern Atheism. 

Balguv's Sermons and Tracts. 

Batchellor's (R.) Logic of Atheism. 

Bayle's Dictionary. (Under Diago- 
ras, Theodoras, and Yaninus.) 

Beecher's ^^Lyman) Atheism, consid- 
ered theologically and politically. 

Bentley's (Kichard) Sermons. 

Berkeley's (Bp.) Works. 

Boyle Lectures. (From 1692 to the 
present.) 

Boyle's Inquiry into Eeceived Mo- 
tions. 

Essay on Final Causes. 

Buchanan's Modern Atheism : as ex- 
hibited under the Forms of Panthe- 
ism, Materialism, Secularism, and 
Development. 18-35. 

Carleton's Darkness of Atheism. 

Charnock's AVorks. 

Cheyne's Philosophical Principles. 

Christian Examiner. 50 : 309. 78 : 

Clarendon's Keply to Hobbes. 

Clarke on the Being and Attributes 
of God. 

Cudworth's Intellectual System. 

Abridged by Dr. Wise. 

Cumberland's Law of Nature. 

Delany's Eevelation examined with 
Candor. 

Doddridge's Lectures. Part II. 

Dix's (Morgan) Lectures on Panthe- 
ism. 

Durham's Demonstration. 

Dwight's Discourses. Disc. 1, 2, and 3. 

Eclectic Eeview. New series. 7:329. 

Edwards on the Visible Structure of 
the World. 

Elliot's Folly of Atheism. 

Foster (James) on Natural Eeligion. 

Fotherby's Atheomastix. 

Gardner's Doomsday Book. 

Grant's (Brewin) Public Discussion 
with G. J. Holyoake, in 1854. 

Godwin's Lectures on the A. Contro- 
versy. 

Gregory's Modern Atheism. 

Grew's Cosmologia Sacra. 

Hale's (Sir Matthew) Origin of Man. 

Hall's (Eobt.) Modern Infidelity. 

Harris on Atheistical Objections. 

Hattecliffe's God or Nothing. 

Hill's Lectures and Eeflections. 



Howel's Spirit of Prophecv. (Agt. 

Hobbes.) 
! Howe's (John) Works. 
I Hunt's Essay on Pantheism. 

Lectures on Secularism, by Gregory, 
I Condor, Savage, and Mellor. 
I Lesser s Insecto-Thcology. 
' Lewis's (Tayler) Plato against the 
I Atheists. 
Mc All's Logic of Atheism. 
; ^IcLaurin's Essays. 
\ McCullock's (John) Sermons. 
Mill on the xVttempted Apj)lication 
of Pantheistic Principles to the His- 
toric Criticism of the Gospel. 
Monthly Eeview. 54 : 163. 
More's (Henry) Philosophical Works. 

Part I. 
Nelson's Cause and Cure of Infidelity. 
Nieuwentyt's Eeligious Philosopher. 
Nichol's Conference with a Theist. 
Parker on God and Providence. 
Pattison's Anti-Nazarenus. 
Pilling on the Existence of God. 
Pironett's Disquisitions. (Against 

Hobbes.) 
Phillips's Dis.Historico-Philosophica. 
Bay's Physico-Theology. (Great, and 
most useful.) 
I Saisset's Modern Pantheism. 1863. 
! Seed's (Jeremiah) Sermons. 
Sparks's Antidote of Atheism, 
Talmot's (Bp.) Sermons. 
Temple's Doctrine of Leviathan. 
Tenison's (Abp.) Sermons. (Agt. 
Hobbes.) 
I Thompson's (E. A.) Christian Theism. 
j Tower's Atheismus Yapulans. 
I Tullock's TJieism. Burnett Prize Es- 
say. 1854. 
Vaughn's (J.) Lectures. Lect. 4. 
Vince's Laws and Constitutions of 
the Heavenly Bodies. (Uses pro- 
found astronomical knowledge in 
the simplest language.) 
Ward's (Bp.) Essay toward an Evic- 
tion, etc. 
Whish on the First Cause. 
Wise's (Tho.) Eeason and Philosophy 

of A. 
Wisheart's (William) Sermons. 
Wharton (Francis) on Theism. 
Woolsey's Unreasonableness of Athe- 
ism. 

The above are a very small speci- 
men of the numerouswriters on this 
subject. 



56J: 



INDEX TO AUTHOBS. 



REVEALED THEOLOGY, 



NECESSITY OF DIVINE REVELATION. 



Clemens Alex., Exhortatio ad 
Gentes. 

Justin Martyr, Apologia. 

Cohortatio ad Griecos. 

Dialogus cum Tryphone. 

Auberlen, die Gottliche Offonbarung. 

Bretschneider's Systemat. Entwicke- 
lung. 

Campbell, de Yanitate Luminis Na- 
turae. 

Laget, Sermons sur divers Sujots. 

Turretini (Jo. Alphonsi) Cogitationes. 

Appleton's Works. Lects. 11, 12, 13. 

Baker's (T.) Reflections on Learning. 

Barrow's Necessity of Christianity. 

Brown's System of Nat. and Revealed 
Religion. 

Bundy's (Richard) Sermons. 

Chandler's Revelation and Society. 

Charnock's (S.) Works. 

Christian Review. 12:186. 

Conybcare on Revealed Religion. 

Delany's Revelation examined with 
Candor. 

Edgecombe's Reason an Insufficient 
Guide. 

Ellis's Knowledge of Divine Things 
not from Reason. 

Farrer's Mission of Christ. 

Foster's (Dr. James) Discourses. 

Fuller's (And.) Part of a Body of Di- 
vinity. 

Gale's Court of the Gentiles. 



Gastrell's (F.) Boyle Lectures. 1793. 

Glanvill's Vanity of Dogmatizing. 

Halyburton's Natural Religion In- 
sufficient. 

Hamilton ( W. T.) on the Pentateuch. 

Hey's Lectures. Bk. 1, ch. 12. 

Jenkins on the Christian Religion. 

Jones's Bampton Lectures. 1821. 

Law's Considerations. 

Leland's Advantage and Necessity of 
Revelation. 

Mant on the Gospel. 

Miller's Division of Scripture. 

Morehead's (R.) Sermons. 

Nares's Evidence versus Reason. 

Norman on the Necessity of Revela- 
tion. 

Penrose's Bampton Lectures. 1808. 

Taylor's Apology of Ben Mordecai. 

Umfreville's Excellence and Neces- 
sity, etc. 

Vincent's (William) Sermons. 

Warburton's Divine Legation of 
Moses. 

Watson's Tracts. 

Watts 's Strength and Weakness of 
Human Reason. 

West's Defence of the Christian Rev- 
elation. 

Whiteley's Essays. (Praised by Por- 
teus.) 

Witherspoon's (John) Works. Vol. 2. 

Woodgate's Bampton Lectures. 1838. 



CHRISTIANITY. 



The Fathers here cited are arranged 
in chronological order. 
Hernias, Philosophi Philosophorum 

Irrisio. 
Justin Martyr, Parsenesis ad Grsecos. 

Oratio ad Grsecos. 

Apologia pro Christianis. 

Apol. secunda pro Christianis. 

de Monarchia Dei. 

Dialogus cum Tryphone. 

Epistola ad Diognetum. 

Tertullian, Apologeticus adversus 

Gentes. 
ad Nationes. 



Tertullian, de Testimonio Animse. 

ad Scapulam. 

adversus Judaeos. 

Oratio ad Catechumenos. 

Athenagoras,Legatio pro Christianis. 

Atheniensis Apologia. 

de Mortuorum Resurrectione. 

Theophilus, contra Calumniatores. 
Clemens (Alex.), Protrepticon ad 

Gentes. 
Minucius Felix, Octavius. 
Origen, contra Celsum. 
Cyprian, de Idololatrium Vanitate. 
Testimonia ad Quirinum. 



INDEX TO AUTHOBS. 



565 



Lactantius, de Mortibus Persecuto- 
rum. 

Athanasius, Oratio contra Gentes. 

Cyril (Alex.), contra Julianum. 

Eusebius, Preparatio Evangelica. 

Demonstratio Evangelica. 

Chrysostom, ad versus Judseos. 

contra Gentiles. 

Ambrose, Kesponsio Eelationi Sym- 
machi. 

Augustine, de Vera Religione. 

de Moribus Ecclesise Catholicae. 

adversus Judseos. 

de Civitate Dei. 

adversus Paganos. 

Arnobius, adversus Gentes 

Arndtius, de Vero Christianismo. 

Bergier, Preuves du Christianisme, 

Bernard, de I'Excellence de la Rel. 
chret. 

Boesnier, Preservatif contre I'lrre- 
ligion. 

Bretschneider's Systematiscbe Ent- 
wickelung. 

Buddei Miscellanea Sacroruni. Part I. 

Cartwright, Certamen Religionum. 

Chateaubriand, Genie du Christian- 
isme. 

Curcellii (Steph.) Opera. 

Du Plessis de Veritate Relig. Chris- 
tianse. 

Edemus de Veritate Eelig. Chris- 
tianae. 

Fabricius de Veritate Relig. Chris- 
tianae. 

Gotti do Veritate, etc. (Acta Erud.) 

Grotius de Veritate Relig. Christ. 
("Equally approved by Catholics 
andProtestants."—C. Butler. A 
fine edit., with English notes and 
illustrations by Middleton. Printed 
1855.) 

Hornbeckii Summa Controversiarum 
Relig. 

Houtville, la Religion chretienne 
prouve par les Faits. (Highly es- 
teemed. It is preceded by an ace. 
of the methods taken by writers for 
and against Christianity.) 

Huetii Demonstratio Evangelica. 

Kortholti Grundlichen Beweis, etc. 

Lamy, Preuves evidentes de la Ve- 
rite, etc. 

Le Clerc, Bibliotheque ancienne et 
moderne. 

Limborch, de Veritate, etc. 

Malebranche, Conversations chreti- 
ennes. 

Pascal, Pensees sur la Religion. 



("Contains the germ of all that 
can be said for or against the Chris- 
tian religion " — Vektouillac.) 

Picteti Dissertationes Theologicse. 

Sagittarii Intro, in Hist. Ecclesiasticse. 

Schuberti de Veritate, etc. 

Stattleri Demonstratio Evangelica. 

Tappen, Wahrheit der christlichen 
Religion. 

Tollner's Gottl. Eingeb. der heiligen 
Schrift. 

Turret! ni Dissertationes. 

Abbadie's Truth of Christ. Trans, 
by Booth. 

Addison's Evidences, etc. (Many edi- 
tions.) 

Alexander's (W. L.) Christ and Chris- 
tianity. 

Alley's Vindicise Christianse. (Com- 
parison of the Greek, Roman, Hin- 
du, Mohammedan, and Christian 
religions.) 

Allix's Reflections on the Holy Scrip- 
tures. 

Apology of Ben Mordecai. (Power- 
ful; with valuable notes bv Henry 
Taylor.) 

Appleton's Works. Lectures 18 to 25. 

Apthorp's Obser. on Gibbon's Decl. 
and Fall. 

Arndt's True Christianity. 

Bampton Lectures. (Particularlv for 
1780, '84, '86, ^87, '88, '92, '94^ '97, 
'98, 1803, '08, '11, '12, '23, '25, '31.) 

Bassett's Reasonableness of Revela- 
tion. 

Bates's (William) Works. Chap. 5. 

Baxter's (Rich.) Reasons of the Chris- 
tian Religion. (Dr. S.Johnson pro- 
nounced it the best work on the 
subject.) 

Bean's Evidences, etc. 

Beattie's Evidences, etc, (Popular.) 

Nature and Immutability of 

Truth. 

Benson's Hulsean Lectures. 1820. 

Biscoe's Acts of the Apostles con- 
firmed from other Authors. 

Bolton's Evidences. (Prize Essav. 
1852.) 

Bonnet's Philosoph. and Critical In- 
quiries. (Refutes modern French 
philosophy.) 

Bo vie (Robt.) Lectures. (Commenced 
1692.) 

Broadley 's Christianity a Divine Rev- 
elation. 

Brown's Essay on the Characteristics. 

Burgess's (Bp.) Easter Catechism. 



b66 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 



Butler's Antilogy of Relig. and Nat. 
Part II. 

Carey's (P. M.) Evid. and Corrup- 
tions of C. 

Chalmers's Evidences, etc. 

Channing's (W. E.) Dudleian Lec- 
ture. 

Chclsum's Remarks on Gibbon's 
Rome. 

Chichester on Deism. 

Clarke's (Dr. Sam.) Reflections on 
Amyntor. 

Truth and Certainty of the Chr. 

Rel. 

Sermons. 

Cook's Historical View of . Chris- 
tianity. 

Croly's Three Cycles of Revelation. 
(Argues the parallelism of the pa- 
triarchal, Jewish, and Christian 
dispensations.) ("More fanciful 
than sound." — Brit. Critic.) 

Crosskey's Defence of Religion. 

Dalrymple on the Causes which Gib- 
bon assigns for the Progress of 
Christianity. 

Davies's Exam, of the Fifteenth and 
Sixteenth Chapters of Gibbon. 

Doddridge's (P.) Evid. (Many edi- 
tions. ) 

Duchall's Presumptive Evidence, etc. 
(" Singular merit." — Kippis. ) 

Duguet's Principles of Relig. Tr. by 
Lalby. 

Durham's Christianity the Friend of 
Man. 

D wight's (Prest.) Discourses. 

Edwards (Dr. John) on the Authority, 
etc. 

Fawcett's (James) Sermons. 

Fell's (John) Lectures. 

Foote's Leading Aspects of Chris- 
tianity. 

Fuller's Gospel its own "Witness. 

Gastrell'd Necessity and Certainty of 
Religion. 

Gisbourne's Survey of Relig. (Ad- 
mired.) 

Goddard on the Mental Condition 
necessary to a Due Inquiry into 
Religious Evidence. 

Gray's (Robt.) Ten Discourses. 

Green's (Robt.) Demonstration of the 
Truth of Christianity. 

Nine Discourses. 

Norrisean Prize Essay. 1796. 

Greenfield's Evid. by Inductive Phi- 
losophy. 

Grew's Cosmoloiria Sacra. 



Grotius on the Truth of the Ch. Re- 
ligion. 

Gurney's Evidences, etc. 

Hale's Influence of Gibbon's Five 
Causes. 

Hammond's Reasonableness of the 

. Christian Religion. 

Hampden's Essay on the Evidences, 
etc. (A worthy companion to But- 
ler's Analogy.) 

Harness's Connection of C. and Hap- 
piness. 

Hey's Lectures on Divinit3^ Vol. I. 

Hodge's Summary of Corroborative 
Evid. 

Hulsean Lectures. 1820, 1821, 1831. 
1837. 

Hunter's (Henry) Evidences, etc. 

Inglis's Vindic. of the Christian 
Faith. 

Ireland's (J.) Chr. and Paganism 
Compared. 

Jenkins's Reasonableness and Cer- 
tainty, etc. 

Jortin's Truth of the Christian Re- 
ligion. 

Knox's (Vicesimus) Christian Phi- 
losophy. 

Lardner's Credibility of the Gospel 
History. 

Leslie's Short Method with the Jews. 

Short Method with the Deists. 

Truth of C. Demonstrated. 

Less's (G.) Demonstration of the 
Truth of the Christian Religion. 

Littleton's Conversion of St. Paul. 

Locke's Reasonableness of Chris- 
tianity. 

Mcllvaine's Evid. (A brief compila- 
tion.) 

Maltby's Illustrations, (Eight good 
dissertations.) 

Marsh's Evid. and Nature of the C. 
Religion. 

Middleton's Miscellaneous Works. 

Moore's (D.) Chr. Vindicated. (Cam- 
bridge prize essay.) 

Nares's Evidences, etc. (Able and 
original.) 

Osterwald's Grounds and Principles, 
etc. 

Palcy's Evidences, etc. 

Horae Paulinae. 

Parker's Demonstration of the Divine 
Authority, etc. 

Penrose's Evidences, etc., from its 
Wisdom. 

Porteus's Summary of the Evidences, 
etc. (Good for young people.) 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 



567 



Price's (Kicb.) Dissertations. Diss. 4. 

Priestley's Letters to a Philosophical 
Unbeliever. 

Ptoberts's Vindication, etc. (Eeply to 
Yolney's Ruins.) 

Eobinson's (Tho.) Nature and Evi- 
dence, etc. 

Posse's (Earl of) Proof of the C. 
Keligion. 

Ryland's (John) Essays. 

iSalsbury's Strictures on Gibbon's 
Rome. 

Scott's (Tho.) "Works. 

Seller's Reasonableness of Belief. 

Sharp's (Gregory) Defence of C. 

Sheppard's Divine Origin, etc. (De- 
duced from evidences which are not 
founded on the authenticity of 
Scripture.) 

Sherlock on the Resurrection of Christ. 

Simmes's Nature and Reception of 
Chr. 

Smith's (J. Pye) Testimony to the 
Messiah. 

SacrijBlce and Priesthood of Christ. 

Sprague's Contrast between Christi- 
anity and other Systems. 

Steele'^^s (J.^ Philosophy of the Evi- 
dences. 



Stephens's Comparison of Christianity 

with other Systems. 
Stillingfleet's Origines Sacrge. 
Sumner's (Bp.) Nature and Reception 

of C. 
Sykes's (A. A.) Truth of Christianity. 
Thompson's Types, Prophecies, and 

Miracles. 
Tillotson's Sermons. 
Tunstall's Acade.mica. 

Lectures. 

Warburton's Divine Legation of 

Moses. 
Watson's (Bp.) Apology. (Replv to 

Gibbon.) 

Tracts. 

Well wood's Authority of the Nevv' 

Testament. 
West's Defence of Revelation. 
Whitby's Necessity, Usefulness, etc. 
Wilson's (J.) Reasonableness of C. 

(An able development of the princi- 
ples of Butler's Analogy.) 

The above are but a fraction of the 
writers on this subject, but are abun- 
dantly sufficient for the purpose of 
this work. See a full list of writers 
for and against Christianity, up to th;- 
14th century, in Cave's Hist. Lite- 
raria. 



MIRACLES. 



Bragge on Our Saviour's Miracles. 

Bulkley on the Miracles of Christ. 

Campbell on Miracles. (Answer to 
Hume.) 

Chapman's M. the Proper Credentials, 
etc. 

Clarke's Boyle Lectures. 1705. 

Col Iyer (W. B.) on Scripture Mira- 
cles. 

Cox's (R. C.) Lectures on Miracles. 

Ditton on the Resurrection of Christ. 

Douglass's Criterion of True Miracles. 

Doyle's Answer to Woolston. 

Encyclopiedia Britannica. Art. "Mir- 
acles." 

Entick's Evidences of Christianity. 

Farmer's Dissertation on Miracles. 
(Great.) 

Fleetwood's Essays on Miracles. 

Hallett's Nature. Kind, and Number 
of Christ's Miracles. 

Hovey's (Alvah) The Miracles of 
Christ. 

Howarth's Hulsean Lectures. 1836. 

Humphrey's (W.G.) Discourses on M. 

Jameson's Analogy between the Mir- 
acles and Doctrines of Scripture. 



Jepton's Reality of our Saviour's 
Miracles. 

Jortin's Boyle Lectures. 1750. 

Lawson (Cha.) on the Miracles of 
Christ. 

Le Bas (Cha. W.) on Miracles. 

Locke on Miracles. 

Mackenzie (M. J.) on Miracles. 

Mant's (Bp.) Works. 

Marsden's Hulsean Lectures. 1844. 

Mayo on the Miracles of our Lord. 

McGuire's Miracles of Christ. 

Mozley's Bampton Lectures. 1800. 

Myers's Mosaic, Historic, and Pro- 
phetic M. 

Ogilvie's Bampion Lectures. 1836. 

Owen's (H.) Bovle Lectures. 176V, 
1770, 1771. 

Peabody's (A. P.) Lectures before the 
Lowell Institute. Lect. 3. 

Penrose's Use of Scripture M. (Very 
able.) 

Ray's Vindication of Christ's Mira- 
cles. 

Reinhard on Miracles. 

Rutherford's Credibility of Miracles. 
(Much valued.) 



568 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 



Seaton's Compendious Yiew of Mira- 
cles. 

Sherlock's Trial of the Witnesses. 

Smallbrooke on Miracles. 

Stebbins's Defence of Scripture His- 
tory. 

Stevenson on the Miracles of Christ. 

Sutton's Christ's Miracles no Alle- 
gories. 

Sykes's Credibility of Miracles. 

Taylor's Apology of Ben Mordecai. 
(Strong.) 

Thompson's (Edw.) Bulwarks of 
Christianity. 

Trench (Francis) on the Miracles of 
our Lord. 

Van Mildort's Boyle Lectures. 1802- 
1804. 

Vince's Credibility of Scripture Mira- 
cles. (Masterly reply to Hume.) 

Wardlaw (Ralph) on Miracles. 

West on the Resurrection. 

Westcott's Characteristics of the Gos- 
pel Miracles. 

Weston on the Rejection of the Chris- 
tian Miracles by the Heathen. 

Westcott's Elements of the Gospel 
Harmony. 

Miracles of the first ages of the 
Church : 
Pro. 
Augustine de Civitate Dei. 
Justin Martyr, Apologia. 

Dialog, cum Tryphone. 

Irenaeus, Opus eruditissimum. Ed. 

Frobenii. 
Minucius Felix, Octavius. 
Origen, contra Celsum. 
TertuUian, ad Scapulam. 
Mosheim, de Rebus ante Constanti- 

num. 
Pfannerus, de Donis Miraculis. 
Schulz's Geistesgaben der ersten 

Christen. 
Balmer's (Robt.) Academic Lectures. 

Pulpit Discourses. 

Barrington's (J. S. ) Miscellanea Sacra. 
Boys's Suppressed Evidence; or. Proof 

from the Records of the Fathers, 

Waldenses, etc. 
Brook's Exam, of Middleton's Free 

Enquiry. 
Burton's Eccles. Hist, of the 2d and 3d 

Centuries. 
Chapman on the Miraculous Powers, 

etc. 



Chapman's Jesuit Cabal Farther 
Opened. 

Church (Tho.) on the Miraculous 
Powers, etc. 

Appeal to the Unprejudiced. 

Dodwell's Free Answer to Middle- 
ton. 

Douglas's Criterion. (Excellent. Ex- 
poses Hume.) 

Fleury's Eecles. Hist. (An essay at 
the end.) 

Heathcote's Animadversions on Mid- 
dleton. 

Jackson's Remarks on Middleton's 
Inquiry. 

Jenkins's (Tho.) Exam, of M.'s "In- 
quiry." 

Newman's (J. H.) Miracles of Eccl. 
History. 

Parker's INEiraculous Powers of the 
Early Fathers. 

Rawlinson's Bampton Lectures. 1859. 

Reeves's Apologies of Justin, Tertul- 
lian, and Minucius. 

Rutherford on Miracles. 

Stebbins's Observations on Middle- 
ton. 

Sykes's Credibility of Miracles. 

Two Questions impartially con- 
sidered. 

Walton's Miraculous Powers of the 
Church. 

Whiston on Demoniacs. 

on the Exact Time when Mirac- 
ulous Gifts ceased in the Church. 

Con. 

Jenkins's Examination of Dodwell's 
reply to Middleton. 

Middleton's Free Inquiry into the 
Miraculous Powers supposed tohavo 
existed in the Church. 

Vindication. (Reply to Dod well 

and Church.) 

Replvto Stebbins and Chapman. 

Reply to Mr. Toll. 

North British Rev. Vol. 4. 

Tillotson's (Abp.) Sermons. 

Toll's Defence of Middleton's Free 
Inquiry. 

Yates's Defence of Middleton's In- 
quiry. 

See a notice of this controversy in a 
note, by Dr. Kipp;s, to Doddridge's 
Lectures, Part VI. ; and in Joseph 
Clarke's Theological Treatises. 



INDEX TO AUTHORS, 



569 



PROPHECY. 



Arnold on the Interpretation of Pro- 
phecy. 

Barker's P. concerning ^Messiah. 

Bates's Use and Intent of Prophecy. 

Bickersteth's Guide to the Prophecies. 

Bouchier on Prophecy and its Ful- 
filment. 

Brooks's (J. W.) Elements of Pro- 
phetical Interpretation. (A conven- 
ient compend.) 

Brown's (J.) Harmony of Prophecy. 

Butler's (W. J.) Testimony of His- 
tory. 

Caulfield's Pall of Babylon. 

Chandler's Antiq. and Auth. of the P. 
of Dan. 

Chauncey (W. S.) on Unaccomplished 
Prophecies. 

Clarke's (S.) Connection of the Pro- 
phecies. 

Claj'ton's Dissertations on Prophecy. 

Davidson's (D.) Test of Prophecy. 

De Burgh's Early Prophecies of a 
Redeemer. 

Dobb's Prophecies which have been 
fulfilled. 

Duflield (Geo.) on the Prophecies. 

Durell's Parallel Proph. of Jacob and 
Moses. 

Elliott's Warburton Lectures. 1849 
to 1853. 

Ellis's (W. W.) Proph. relating to 
Christ. 

Faber's Calendar of the P. (Chiefly 
those which relate to Antichrist.) 

P. relating to the Jews. 

Fairbairn on P. (Its nature, func- 
tions, etc.) 

Frazer's Key to the Unaccomplished 
Prophecies. 

Frere's Combined View of Esdras, 
Daniel, and John. 

Fry (John) on the Unfulfilled Pro- 
phecies. 

Fry's fT. ) Scripture Prophecies. 

Greenhill's (Jos.) Proph. of the N. 
Testament. 

Habershon's Connection of the Pro- 
phecies of the Apocalypse and 
Daniel. 

on the Chronological Prophecies. 

Hardy's Prophecies of the Bible, par- 
ticularly those of John. 

Hengstenberg's Nature of the Prophe- 
cies. 

Holmes's (Robt.) Bampton Lectures. 
1782. 



Hoare's (W. H.) Harmony of the 
Apocalypse with other Prophecies ; 
with an Outline of the Various In- 
terpretations. 

Horsley's (Bp.) Sermons. Sor. 15-18. 

Prophecies of Messiah dispersed 

among the Heathen. 

Hurd's Introduction to the Study of 
the Prophecies. (Chiefly those re 
lating to Popery.) 

Jefi'ries on the Perfection of Religion. 

Jennings's Jewish Antiquities. 

Joiies's Key to Prophetical Language. 

Jortin's Boyle Lectures. 1730. 

Jurieu on the Accomplishment of 
Prophecy. (A strong attack on 
Popery.) 

Keith's (A.) Signs of the Times. 1833. 

Ketts's History the Interpreter of 
Prophecy. ("Written with great 
elegance and judgment." — Bp. 

TOMLINE.) 

Kelly's (James) Lectures on Subjects 
connected with Prophecy. 

Lardner's Destruction of Jerusalem. 

Leach's Lectures on Fulfilled Prophe- 
cies. 

Ly all's Propa?dia Prophetica. 

McCaul's Warburton Lectures. 1846. 
(Prophecy as a Proof of Christian- 
ity.) 

McLaurin on the P. rel. to Messiah. 

McLeod on the Principal Prophecies. 

Maitland's Connected View of Pro- 
phecy. (A valuable collection of 
authorities from the Fathers down 
to 1849.) 

Marsh's Lectures, Lect. 20, 21. 

Mead on the Prophecies. 

Monthly London Lectures on Pro- 
phecy. (Able sermons by Collier, 
Bird, Pye Smith, Fletcher, Orme, 
etc.) 

Newton (Bp.) on P. which have been 
fulfilled. 

Newton (Sir I.) on Daniel and the 
Apocal. 

Nolan 's(F.)Warburton Lectures. 1837. 

Philips (J. S.) on the Interpretation 
of Prophecy. 

Purves on Prophetic Time. 

Randolph's Prophecies cited in the 
N. Test, compared with the He- 
brew Original. 

Roberts's Manual of Prophecy. (Com- 
pares the prophecies with the events 
which fulfilled them. ) 



570 



L\DEX TO AUTHORS. 



Hobinson's Prophecies of the Mes- 
siah. 

Eule's Calculations of Time, etc. 

Sharp (Granville) on Several Impor- 
tant P. 

Sherlock's Use and Inteiit of Pro- 
phecy. 

Simpson's Key to the P. (Many edi- 
tions.) 

Smith's (J. Pye) Dissertations. 

Discourses. 

Smith's (Dr. John) Summary View 
of Prophecy. (A good abstract 
from Lowth, Newcombe, Newton, 
and Blaney.) 

South wark Morning Lectures.. (By 
Baxter, Powler, Manton, Poole, 
Owen, etc.) 

Ta3^1or's Comp. of Revelation with 
Daniel. 

Theol. and Lit. Journal. (Many ar- 
ticles.) 

Thompson (Ed.) on Prophecy and 
Miracles. 

Thurston's Researches on P. 

Tower's Illustrations of Prophecy. 

Turner's Origin. Character, and In- 
terp. of P. 



Twell's Boyle Lectures. 1733. 

Van MildeVt's Bovle Lectures. 1802- 
1804. 

Vint's Dissertations on Prophecy. 

Wangh's (J. S.) Diss, on the Prophe- 
cies. 

Ward's (Wm.) Declensions and Res- 
torations of the Church. 

Wellwood on Prophecy. 

Whiston's Boyle Lectures. 1707. 

Whitaker's General and Connected 
View. 

White's Christianity and Moham- 
medanism. 

Whitelev's Scheme and Completion 
of P. " 

Williams's Boyle Lectures. 1695. 

Wilkins's Hist, of the Destruction of 
Jerusalem as Connected with P. 

Winchester on the Prophecies. 

Zouch's Attempt to Illustrate some 
of the Prophecies. (Learned and 
cautious.) 
A "Dictionary of Writers on the 

Prophecies,-' with the titles, was 

published in 1835, by the Editor of the 

London Investisrator. — M. Brooks. 



PROPHECY AS A PROOF OF REVELATION. 



Bates's Div. of the Christian Reli- 
gion. Oh. 4. 

Berriman's (W.j Sermons. 

Bonnet's Inquiries. 

Boyle on the Fulfilment of Script. 
Prophecy. 

Brown's Harmony of Scripture Pro- 
phecies. 

Chalmers's Evidences of Christianity. 

Conybeare's (Bp.) Sermons. 

Flemming's Fulfilling of Scripture. 

Gordon's Christianity Supported by P. 

Hey's Lectures. Chap. 1. 



Horsloy's (Bp.) Sermons. 

Jenkins's Reasonableness of Chris- 
tianity. 

La Pluchcs's Truth of the Gospel. 

Paley's Evidences. Part II. ch. 1. 

Powell's (Samuel) Sermons. 

Skelton's (P.) Sermons. 

Warburton Lectures, viz.: 

Allwood, 1815. Apthorp, 1786. Ba- 
got, 1780. Davidson, 1824. Hali- 
fax, 1776. Hurd, 1772. Nares, 1805 
Nolan, 1837. Pearson, 1811. 



HARMONY OF REVELATION AND SCIENCE. 



Bonar, Concordia Scientiae cum Fide. 

1665. (Curious.) 
Bouterwick's Religion und Vernunft. 
D'Aubigne, Foi et Science. 
Erdman's Vorlesung. zu Glauben u. 

Wissen. 
Kuhn's Glauben und Wissen. 
Pauvert, Harmonic de la Religion, et 

de I'lntelligence humaine. 
Wiseman (Nic.) Sur le Rapport entre 

la Science et la Religion. 
American Eclectic Review. 2 : 186. 
American Quarterly Observer. 2 : 24. 



Bibliotheca Sacra. 13:80. 14:338, 

461. 
Blackwood's Magazine. 6 : 35. 
Bridgewater Treatises. 
Brougham's Advant. and Pleas, of 

Science. 
Buckland's Reliquise Diluvianje. 
Combes's Relation between Science 

and Religion. 
Dick's Christian Philosopher. 
Dingle's Harm, of Revelation and 

Science. 
D'Oyly's (George) Sermons. 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 



571 



Exley on the First Chapter of Genesis. 

Farrar's (Adam) Sermons at Oxford. 

Forbes's Progress of Science. 

Hampden's Philosoph. Evidence of 
Christianity. 

Harcourt's Doctrine of the Deluge. 

Harris's Pre-Adamite Earth. (Popu- 
lar.) 

Hitchcock's Kelig. Truth illust. from 
Science. 

London Quarterly Keview. 79 : 49. 

Mailler's Philosophy of the Bible. 

Melville's (Henry) Sermons. 

Morell's History of Philosophy and 
Science. 

Nares's Bampton Lectures. 1805. 

Nolan-s Bampton Lectures. 1833. 

North American Review. 39 : 293. 

Pendleton's Science a Witness for the 
Bible. 

Pratt's Scrip, and Science not at Va- 
riance. 



Eagg's Creation's Testimony to its 
God. 

Scott's (R. E.) Limits of Physical 
Science. 

Silliman's Consistency of the Discov- 
eries of Modern Geology with Sa- 
cred History. 

[Taylor's] Nat. Hist, of Enthusiasm. 

Troup's (George) Art and Faith. 

Tullidge's Triumphs of the Bible. 

Walker's (James) Sermons. 

Warburton's (Bp.) Sermons. 

Wiseman's (Nic.) Connection between 
Science and Religion. 

Williams's (Cha.) First Week of 
Time. 

Wood's Mosaic Creation illustrated 
bv Discoveries and Experiments in 
the Present Age. 1811. 

Worgan's Divine Week. 

Wright's Creation and Geology. 



UNITY OF THE HUMAN RACE. 



Pro. 



De Salles, Hist, generale des Races hu- 
maines. 

Humboldt's Ansichtender Natur. 

Agassiz's Origin of the Human Races. 
(Maintains that all mankind are of 
one species, but did not originate 
from one pair.) 

Amer. Biblical Repos. 2d series. 
10 : 29. 

Bachman's Doct. of the Unity, etc. 
examined on the Principles of 
Science. 

Cabell's Testimony of Modern Sci- 
ence to the Unity of Mankind. 

Caldwell's Unity ot' the Race of Man. 

Christian Examiner. 49 : 111. 

Christian Quart Spect. 3 : 56. 

Christian Review. 16 : 226. 

Dawson's (J. W.) Archaia. 

Democratic Review. 11 : 111. 

Hamilton's Pentateuch and its Assail- 
ants. 

Johnes's Philological Proofs of the 
Recent Origin of the Human Race. 
(From a comparison of the lan- 
guages of Europe, Asia, Africa, 
and America.) 

Kames's Origin and Diversity of 
Mankind. 

Knox's Races of Men. 

Latham's Varieties of Mankind. 

Man and his Migrations. 

Lord's Theol. and Lit. Jour. 3:424. 

Meade's (Bp.) The Bible and the 
Classics. 



Monthly Review. 119 : 18. 

North Amer. Rev. 73: 163. 

North British Review. 4:177. 

Pickering on the Races of Men. 

Presbyterian Quarterly Rev, 3:177. 

Prichard's Physical History of Man- 
kind. 

Princeton Rev. 21:159. 22:313,603. 
31 : 103. 

Prot. Episc. Monthly Review. 3 : 68. 

Quarterly Review. 

Smith's (Sam. S.) Causes of the Di- 
versity of Figure, Color, etc. 

Strictures on Lord Karnes. 

Smyth's (Tho.) Unity of the Human 
Race. (Reviews Agassiz.) 

Tullidge's (Henry) Triumphs of tho 
Bible. 

Van Arminge's Natural History of 
Man. 

Wartz's Anthropology of the Uncivil- 
ized Races. ' 

Co 71. 

Gobineau's Moral and Intellectual 
Diversity of Races. Tr. by Hotz ; 
with notes. 

Morton's (Dr. S. G.) Types of Man- 
kind. 

Archaeology of the Amer. In- 
dians. 

Hybridity in Men and Animals. 

Crania xEgyptiaca. 

Nott & Gliddon's Types of Man- 
kind. 

Indigenous Races of the Earth. 



572 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 



CANON OP SCRIPTURE. 



Cochlaeus de Canonica S. S. 

Credner's Geschichte des Canons. 

Frick de Cura Vet. Ecc. circa Cano- 
nem S. S. 

Kortlioltus de Canone. 

Millii Prolegomena ad Nov. Test. 

Morus de Canone Scripturge. 

Planck de Signif. Canonis in Ecc. 
Antiq. 

Reuss, Histoire du Canon, etc. 

Schmidii Vindicatio Canonis Y. et 
N. T. 

Strosch, Hist, critica de Librorum N. 
T. 

Van Mastricht, Commentatio de Ca- 
none, etc. 

Weber's Gesch. des Neutestamentl. 
Kanons. 

Wollius de Integritate Codicis sacri. 

Alexander (A.) on the Canon of S. S. 

Amer. Quart. Church Review. 17 : 583. 

Blair (John) on the Canon of Scrip- 
ture. 

Brvant's ( Jac.) Authent. of the Christ. 
Relig. 

Christian Quart. Spect. 10 : 69. 

Cosin's Scholastic Hist, of the Canon. 

Dupin's Complete Hist, of the Canon, 
etc. 



Findlay's Vindication. 

Gaussen on the Canon of Scripture. 

General Repository. 4 : 1. 

Giles's (J. A.) Hebrew Records. 

Jenkins's Reasonableness of Chris- 
tianity. 

Jones's (Jer.) Method of settling the 
Canon. (Best short treatise.) 

Kitto's Journal. 7 : 174. 

Lardnor's Credibility of the Gospel 
Hist. 

Antiquities. 

Nye on the Canon. 

Owen's Introd. to Comment, on He- 
brews. 

Prideaux's Connection of 0. and N. 
Test. 

Richardson's Vindication. (Reply to 
Toland's Ainvntor.) 

Stuart's (Moses) Defence of the O. T. 
Canon. 

Townley's Illustrations of Biblical 
Literature. 

United States Literary Gazette. 5 : 
327. 

Westcott's Hist, of the Canon of the 
N. T. during the First Four Centu- 
ries. 

VV^adsworth 's Hulsean Lectures. 1847. 



INSPIRATION. 



Carpzovius de Divina Inspiratione. 

Credner de Librorum N. T. Inspira- 
tione. 

Dupin, Prologomena. 

Gaussen, Theopneustie. 

Grotius de Veritate Rclig. Christianse. 

Henrici Lucubrationes. 

Huetii Demonstratio Evangelica. 

Potter, Prelectiones Theologicse. 

Quenstedtius de Divina Inspiratione. 

Sontagii de Inspiratione, ej usque 
Ratio. 

Waltheri (Mich.) Dissertations. 

Appleton's (Pres.) Works. Lect. 26, 
27. 

Bailey's (Benj.) Essay on Inspira- 
tion. 

Bannerman on Inspiration. 

Bateman (Josiah) on the Inspiration, 
etc. 

Baylie's (J.) Authority and Inspira- 
tion, etc. 

Bennet's (Benj.) Sermons. (Fourteen 
on this subj.) 

Bibliotheca Sacra. 12:217. 15:29,314. 



Bingham (W. A.) on the Insp. of 
Scripture. 

Bogue's (David) Essays. 

Burgon's Bible and Modern Thought. 

Burnet on the Thirty-Nine Articles. 
Art. 6. 

Butler's Analogy of Relig. and Na- 
ture. Part II. 

Butler's (W.) Testimony of History. 

Calamy's (Edmund) Sermons. 

Calmet's Dissertations. 

Campbell (Geo.) on the Four Gos- 
pels. 

Carlvle's Origin and Authority of the 
S.^Scr. 

Carson's (A.) Refutation of Hender- 
son. 

Review of Wilson, Smith, and 

Dick. 

Cellerier's Divine Origin of the Old 
Testament. 

Chalmers's Evidences of Christianity. 

Christ. Examiner. 8:362. 32:119, 
204. 35:340. 

Christian Review. 9:1. 12 : 219. 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 



573 



Davidson's (Sam.) Text of 0. T. con- 
sidered. 

Davies's (S.) Xatnre of the Divine 
Agency as to Inspiration, 

Dick (John) on Inspiration. 

Doddridge's Dissertations on the Xew 
Test. 

Dyer on the Inspiration of Sacred 
Scripture. 

Eclectic Eeview. 4th Series. 1:91. 
11 : 365. 

Emmons's (;N"athaniel) Sermons. 

Eindlay'sYindic. of the Sacred Books 
and Joseph us. (Reply to Voltaire.) 

Fuller's Part of a Body of Divinity. 

Gasparin on Plenary Inspiration. 

Gaussen's Theopneustia. Tr. by E. 
N. Kirk. 

Gerard's Institutes of Criticism. 

Haldane (Robt.) on Inspiration. 

Hawker's Evidence of Plenary Inspi- 
ration. 

Henderson (E.) on Divine Inspira- 
tion. 

Hervey's (A.) Five Sermons. 

Hinds'on the Inspiration and Autho- 
rity, etc. 

Howarth on Revealed Religion. 

Jenkins's Reasonableness of Chris- 
tianity. 

Kelly's Exam, of Davidson's State- 
ment. 

Kitto's Journal. 5:437. 7:315. 

La Mothe on Inspiration. 

Le Clerc's Letters. 

Lee's Nature and Proofs of Inspira- 
tion. 

Leslie's Easy Method with Deists. 

Lond. Quart. Rev. 10 : 286. 

Lowe's Insp. a Reality. (Reply to 
Macnaught.) 

Lowth's (S.) Insp. of the Holy Scrip- 
tures. 

Lowth's (W.) Authority and Insp. 
of Sac. Scr. 

McCaul's Testimonies to the Autho- 
rity, etc. 

Macleod's View of Inspiration. 

]\[acnaught on Inspiration. 

Marston's Manual on the Inspiration, 
etc. 

Methodist Quart. Review. 5 : 594. 

Michaelis's Introd. to the New Test. 
Ch. 3. 

Middleton's Miscellaneous Works. 

Morell's Philosophy of Religion. 

Morris's (A. G.) The Bible, What is 
it? 

New Englander. 7: 515. 



Newton (Bp.) on the Prophecies. 

Noble on Plenary Inspiration. 

Paley's Evidences of Christianity. 

Parry on the Insp. of the Apostles. 

Powell's Nature and Extent of Inspi- 
ration. 

Prettyman's Elements of Christian 
Theology. 

Princeton Review. 29 : 598, 660. 

Redford's Holy Scriptures verified by 
Science, History, and Human Con- 
sciousness. 

Scott's (Thomas) Essays. 

Seeker's (Abp.) Sermons. 

Seed's Sermons at the Moyer Lecture. 
1747. 

Simpson's Plea for the Sacred Writ- 
ings. (A masterly refutation of 
Deism.) 

Spirit of the Pilgrims. 1 : 402, 474, 624. 
2 : 9, 70, 185, 237, 289. 3 : 369, 420. 

Stennet's Authority and Use of Scrip- 
ture. 

Storr on the Historical Sense. 

Stuart's (Moses) Critical History and 
Defence of the Old Testament 
Canon. 

Taylor's (D.) Truth and Insp. of 
Scripture. 

Thomson's (Alex.) Lectures. 

Tillotson's Sermons. 

Tomline's Introd. to the Study of 
Scripture. 

Townscnd's (George) Works. 

Van Mildert's (William) Sermons. 

Vaughn's (J.) Lectures. Lect. 9. 

Wardlaw's (Ralph) Discourses. 

Watson's (Rich.) "Theological Tracts. 

Apology for the Bible. 

Westcott's Elements of Gospel Har- 
mony. 

Wettenhall's Div. Authority of Sac. 
Script. 

Whitehead's (Robt.) Warrant of 
Faith. 

Whittington's Inspiration of the Old 
Test. 

Whitbv's Preface to Commentary on 
N. T. 

Wilkinson's (T.) Inspiration of Scrip- 
ture. 

Williams's (Bp.) Boyle Lectures. 1695, 
1696. 

Wilson (Bp.) on Plenary Inspiration. 

Wilson's (John) Essay on Enthusi- 
asm. 

Wood's (Leonard) Works. 

Wordsworth's Five Lectures in West- 
minster Abbey. 1861. 



574 



INDEX TO AUTHORS, 



BIBLICAL HISTORY. 



Alexandri Historia Eccles. Yet. Test. 

Alliolis Biblischen Alterthumskunde. 

Andilly, Histoire de I'ancien Testa- 
]nent. 

Ba>nage, Histoire da vieux Testa- 
ment. 

Berruyer, Histoire du Penplede Dieu. 

Buddjei Historia Ecclesiastica Y. T. 

Capelli Historia Sacra et Exotica. 

Carpzovii Ajjparatus Historic Criti- 
cus. 

Eusebii Chronicon. 

Heideggeri Historia Patriarcharum. 

Hornii Historia Ecclesiastica. ' 

Josephi Opera. 

Kurtz's Biblische Geschichte. 

Langii Historia Ecclesiastica Yet. 
Test. 

Levdecker, Historia Eccles. Yet. et N. 
test. 

Nichol, Hist. Sacra. (Acta Erud. 
1712.) 

Robinson, Annales Mundi, sacri et 
secularis. 

Saurin, Discours historiques, cri- 
tiques, etc. 

Schmidii Compendium. (Acta Erud. 
1708.) 

Selden de Diis Syriis. 

Simon, Hist, critique du Yieux Test. 

Spanheim, Introd. ad Hist, et Antiq. 
Sac. 

Spondanii Annales Sacri a Creatione. 

Yitringpe Hypotyposis. 

Yossii Historia de Idolatria. 

Witsii Miscellanea Sacra. 

Basnage's History of the Jews, 

Bedford's Scripture Chronology de- 
monstrated by Astronomical Cal- 
culation. 

Bell's Mission of St. John. 

Biscoe's Hist, of the Acts of the Apos- 
tles confirmed from other Authors. 

Blome's Hist, of the Old and New 
Test. 

Calmet's History of the Old and New 
Test. 

Clarke's Bible History. (Malachi to 
Christ.) 

Craddock'sHist. of the 0. Test, meth- 
odized. 



Craddock's Apostolical History meth- 
odized. 

Ell wood's Sacred Hist, of the 0. and 
! N. T. 

Fleury's Hist, of the Israelites. 
! Gale's Court of the Gentiles. 
j Geneste's Parallel Histories of Judah 

and Israel. (Yaluable matter.) 
I Gleig's (G. R.) History of the Bible. 
I (Maps.) 

I Hall's (Bp.) Contemplations. 
I Hawker's (Robt.) Extracts and Notes. 

Hawkins's Objects and Uses of the 
Historical Scriptures of the 0. T. 

Howard's Scripture History of the 
Earth. 

Howell's Hist, of the Bible. (Plates.) 

Jamieson's Use of Sacred History. 

Jones's (Jos.) Chronol. and Analysis 
ofSc. 

Kimpton's History of the Bible. 

Kurtz's History of the Old Covenant. 
Trans, by J. Martin. 

Kurtz's (J, G.) ^lanual of Sacred 
History. (Learned and interest- 
ing.) 

Palfrey's (J. G.) Academical Lec- 
tures. 

Parker's (S.) Old Test. Illustrated. 

Sliuckford's Connection of Sac. and 
Prof. Hist. 

Simon's Critical History of the Old 
Test. 

Smith's History of the Old Testament. 

History of the New Testament. 

Stackhouso's Hist, of the Bible. (Poor.) 

Stillingfleet's Origines Sacrae. 

Thompson's (And.) Scripture His- 
tory. 

Trimmer's Sacred History. 

Watts 's (Isaac) Scripture Histor}'. 

Wheeler's (J. S.) Analysis of N. Test. 
Hist. (Yery valuable.) 

Winder's History of Knowledge. 

There exists a vast multitude of 
Bible histories, but few are as lucid 
and interesting as the Bible itself. 
Some, however, are useful as school- 
books, and some as works of general 
reference. 



DEISM. 



Pro. 
Barthius (Jo. Henr.) de Yera Reli- 
o;ione. 



Bodini (Joann.) Colloquium. 

Celsii Opera. 

Chawin, de Natural! Religione. 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 



575 



Connor, Evangelium Medici. 

Constant (B.), Eeligion consideree 
dans ses Sources, ses Formes, etc, 

De la Serre, Examen de la Eeligion. 

Diderot, Pensees philosophiques. 

Gebhard, Cogitationes rationales. 

Ganlingii Observationes Selectte. 

Herbert de Veritate. (The first to 
make Deism a science. 1624.) 

de Causis Errorum. 

de Keligione Grentilium. 

Hobbesii Opera Philosophica. 

Holbach, Christianisnie devoile. 

Langsdorf's Gott und die Natur. 

Leibnitz, Opera Theologica. 

Machiavellii Discursisin Livium. 

Meyeri Philosophia. 

Mirabaud, Systeme de la Nature. 

Muralt, sur la Religion essentielle. 

Parizot, la Foi devoilee par la Raison. 

Pevrerii Preadamitae. 

Eoell, de Eeligione Naturali. 

Itousseau, Confessions, etc. 

Emile. 

Various other works. 

Sue, Lettres sur la Eeligion. 

Vanini Amphitheatrura. 

Voltaire, Epitre a Urane. 

Lettres philosophiques. 

Various other Works. 

Blount's Anima Musedi. 

Life of Apollonius Tvaneus. 

Oracles of Eeason. 

Bolingbroke's Letters on History. 

Philosophical Eeligion. 

Various other works. 

Browne's Eeligio Medici. 

Chubb's Discourse on Miracles. 

Foundation of the Christ. Eeli- 
gion. 

Subjects of the Old Testament. 

True Gospel of Christ asserted. 

on Eedemption. 

Four Dissertations. 

Collection of Tracts. 

Previous Question. 

Collins's Enquiry into Human Lib- 
erty. 

Ground of the Christian Eeli- 
gion. 

on Free Thinking. 

Scheme of Literal Prophecy. 

Man's other Voices. 

Vind. of the Divine Attributes. 

Elwell on the Incarnation. 

English's Grounds of Christianity 
examined. 

Evanson's Doctrine of the Trinity. 

Dissonance of the Evans-elists. 



Evanson's Letter to Dr. Hurd. 

Letter to Dr. Priestley. 

Hartlc}' on the Human Mind. 

Hobbes's Historical Narration of Her- 
esy. 

Human Nature. 

Letter on Liberty and Necessity. 

Letter to the Duke of Newcastle. 

Leviathan. 

Hume's Essay on Miracles. 

Treatise on Human Nature. 

Dialogues. 

Karnes's (Lord) Essays. 

Lyon's Infallibility of Human Judg- 
ment. 

Morgan's Moral Philosopher. 

Deism fairly stated. 

Conceptions of the Jews con- 
sidered. 

Defence of the Moral Philoso- 
pher. 

Physico-Theology. 

Eeply to Chandler. 

Sacerdotism displayed. 

New Harmony Gazette. Pub. from 
1825 to 1834, by E. Dale Owen. 

Newman's (F. W.) Theism. 

Paine 's Age of Eeason. (Numerous 
replies, viz., by Disney, Drew, Est- 
lin, McNeille, Scott, Simpson, Wat- 
son, etc.) 

Palmer's Principles of Nature. 

Shaftesbury's Charac. of Men, Man- 
ners, etc. 

Syke's Innocency of Error. 

Taylor's Translation of the Argu- 
ments of Celsus, Porphyry, and J u- 
lian. 

Tindall's Christianity as old as Crea- 
tion. 

Toland's Amyntor. 

Pantheisticon. 

Christianity not Mysterious. 

Volney's Works. 

Woolston's Discourses on Miracles. 

Defence of do. 

Moderator. 

Supplement to Moderator. 

Second Supplement to Moderator. 

A multitude of other Deistical wri- 
ters might be cited, especially in the 
German language, but the arguments 
are the same in all. 

Con. 
Origen, contra Celsus. 
Abbadie, Verite de la Eelig. chre- 

tienne. 



576 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 



Baumgarten, Opera. 

Bergier, Deisme refute par lui-meme. 

Bullet, Reponses critiques. (Refutes 
many cavils of the infidels of the 
18th century.) 

Carpzovii Apparatus Historico-criti- 
cus. 

Crouzas, Examen du Pyrronisme, 
ancienne et moderne. 

Deylingii Observationes Sacrse. 

Diecanni Schediasma de Xaturalismo. 

Fabricii Delectus Argumentorum 
Veritat. Religionis Christ, versus 
Atheos, Deistas, Judseos, etc. 

Grotius, de Veritate Relig. Christianse. 

Houtteville, le Christianisme .prouve 
par les Faits. 

Huetii Demonstratio. 

Jacquelot, Defense de la Religion. 

Kortholtus de Tribus Impostoribus. 
(Herbert, Hobbes, and Spinoza.) 

Langii Causa Dei et Religionis. 

Le Clerc, de I'Incredulite. 

Lemper, Vorbericht der Nachricht. 

Less"s VVahrheitderChristl. Religion. 

Limborch de Veritate Rel. Christ. 

Loescheri Prenotiones Theologicse. 

Mersen, Impiete des Deistes. 

Mussei (Jo.) Dissertatio. [Contra 
Herbert.) 

Noesselt's Wahrheit und Gottlich- 
keit, etc. 

Olearii Synopsis Controversiarum. 

Pfaffii (Chr.) Dissertationes. 

Picteti (Benedict.) Dissertationes. 

Placette, Reponse a M, Bayle. 

Rosemond, Defense de la Rel. chre- 
tienne. 

Stein's Apologetik der Offenbarung. 

Titius de Insulficientia Rel. naturalis. 

Tribbechovii Historia Naturalismi. 

Trin's Freydencker Lexicon. 

Turretin de Veritate et Divinitate, 
etc. 

Wolfii Manichaeismus ante Mani- 
chseos. 

Wellii Oratio in CoUinum. 

Allix's Reflections on the Old Testa- 
ment. 

Applegarth on the Human Under- 
standing. 

Apthorp's (East) Prevalence of Chris- 
tianity before its Civil Establish- 
ment. (Gives a very useful account 
of civil and ecclesiastical historians. ) 

Asgill's (J.) Reply to Woolston on 
Miracles. 

Atkinson on Christianity. (Replv to 
Tindall.) 



Atkinson's Remarks on a Late Work. 
(Reply to Morgan.) 

Atkey's Examination of " Christi- 
anity as old as Creation." 

Ayscough on Gospel Obedience. 

Balguy's Letters to a Deist. 

Bates's Infidelity Scourged. (Replv 
to Chubb.) 

Beard's Christian Relig. defended 
from the Assaults of Owenism. 

Belknap's Dissertation. (Answer to 
Paine.) 

Benson's Answer to Morgan. 

Bentley's Remarks on a Late Dis- 
course, etc. (A powerful answer to 
Collins.) 

Bergier's Deism Self-confuted. 

Berkeley's Minute Philosopher. 

Berriman's Boyle Lectures. 1730. 

Bidlack's Bampton Lectures. 1811. 

Bliss's Observations. (Reply to 
Chubb.) 

Bolton's Hulsean Prize Essay. 1852. 

Boyle Lectures. (Annual since 1692.) 

Boyle on Things above Reason. 

on the Resurrection. 

Bradlev's Impartial View. (Ans. to 
Blount.) 

Bramhall against Hobbes. 

Broadley on the Evidences, Internal 
and External, of the Religion of 
Moses. 

Broughton's Answer to Tindall. 

Brown (Bp.) on the Human Under- 
standing. 

Brown's Essay on the " Characteris- 
tics." 

Burnett's Scriptural Doctrine of Re- 
demption. (Reply to Morgan.) 

Butler's Analogy of Religion and 
Nature. 

Calamy's Sermons. 

Campbell on Miracles. 

Cary's (S.) Review of English's 
" Grounds of Christianity." 

Chalmers's Evidences of Christianity. 

Chandler (Edw.) on the Prophecies of 
the O. Test. (Reply to Collins.) 

Chandler's (S.) Vind. of the Christ. 
Religion. 

on the Conduct of Modern Deists. 

Antiquity and Authority of the 

Prophecies of Daniel. 

Reasons for being a Christian. 

on the History of the Old and 

New Testaments. (Reply to Mor- 
gan.) 

Chichester's Deism and Christianity. 

Chapman's Eusebius. 



lAWEX TO AUTHOBS. 



577 



Chapman's Eeply to Morgan and Tin- 
dall. 

Kemurks on the Prophecies of 

Daniel. (Eeply to Collins.) 

Clark's (Dr.) Keflections on that part 
of the book called Amyntor^ which 
relates to the Writings of the Primi- 
tive Fathers. 

Clayton's Vindication of Scripture. 
(Keply to Bolinghroke.) 

Collyer's Lectures. 

Conybeare's Defence of Eeligion. 
(Reply to Tindall. "The best- 
reasoned book in the world." — 
Warburton.) 

Curtis's Folly and Danger of Infidelity 

Dalr3miple's Inquiry into the Second- 
ary Causes which Mr. Gibbon as- 
signs for the Rapid Progress of 
Christianity. 

Delany's Revelation examined with 
Candor. 

Ditton on Christ's Resurrection. 

Doddridge's Lectures. Part YI. 

Answer to Chubb. 

Dwight's Discourses. (Infidel Phi- 
losophy.) 

Earbury's Deism Refuted. 

Eclectic Review. New Series. 3 : 253. 

Edinburgh Review. 2 : 661. 

Ellis on Hume's Essay on Miracles. 

Entick's Evidences. ( Reply to 

Woolston.) 

Everett's (E.) Defence of Christi- 
anity. 

Fenton's Ladv Moyer's Lectures. 
1728. 

Fleming's (Caleb) Trutli and Deism 
at Variance. 

Forbes (D.) on Incredulity. 

Foster's (James) Usefulness and Truth 
of Christianitv. (Answer to Tin- 
dall.) 

Frothingham (N. L.) on Deism. 

Fuller's Gospel it^ Own "Witness. 

Gassendi's Answer to Herbert's De 
Vei'itate. 

Gastrell's Certaint}^ of Christianity. 

Gibson's Pastoral Letters. 

Gilderdale on Nat. and Rev. Religion. 

Giles's (Rev. Dr.) Christian Records. 

Girdlestone's Anatomy of Skepticism. 

Graves's Lectures on the Pentateuch. 

Evidences of Christ's Resurrec- 
tion. (Reply to Woolston.) 

Gurdon's Bovle Lectures. 1721 and 
1722. 

Gregory's (Olinthus) Evidences, etc. 

Grove (H.) on Christ's Resurrection. 



Haldane (Robt.) on Divine Revela- 
tion. 

Hallet on Providence. (Powerful.) 

Hall's (Robt.) Infidelity considered 
with reference to its Influence on 
Society. 

Halyburtons Inquirv. (Reply to Her- 
bert.) 

Hamilton's Pentateuch and its Assail- 
ants. 

Harris's Reasonableness of Believing. 

Home's (Geo.) Letters on Infidelity. 

Home's (T. H.) D. Refuted. (Many 
editions.) 

Hulsean Lectures. Commenced 1820. 
(The Lectures bv Benson, 1820, 
Franks, 1821, Wordsworth, 1848, 
Curry, 1852, and others, are very 
able, and are printed separately.) 

Ibbot's (Benj.) Boyle Lectures. 1721, 
1722. 

Jackson's (J.) Examination. (Ans. 
to Chubb.) 

Plea for Reason. (Rep. to Tin- 
dall.) 

Address to Deists. 

Jeffry's True Grounds and Reasons. 
I Jew's Letters to Voltaire. (By Guin- 
j nee.) 

Johnston's Christ, older than Crea- 
tion. 

Jones on the Canon. (Reply to To- 
land.) 

Jortin's (J.) Discourses. 

Kidder's Demonstration of the Mes- 
siah. 

King's Origin of Evil. 

La Crosse's Animad. on "Oracles of 
Reason." 

Lardner's Credibility of the Gospel 
History. 

Circumstances of the Jews. 

Lavington on the Types. (Replj^ to 
Collins.) 

Law's Case of Reason. (Reply to Tin- 
dall.) 

Lawson's Exam, of Hobbes's "Le- 
viathan." 

Le Clerc's Causes of Incredulity. 

Leek's Interpretation of the Law and 
Prophets. (Reply to Woolston.) 

Leslie's Short Method with Deists. 

Less's Authority, Preservation, and 
Credibility, etc. (Trans, bj' King- 
don.) 

Lindsay (H.) on Infidelity. 

Lobb's Defence of Relig. (Ans. to 
Collins.) 

London Quart. Review. 3:1. 



m 



578 



INDEX TO AVTHORS. 



Lowman's Hebrew Government. 

on Prophecy. (Ans. to Collins.) 

Lyttleton on the Conversion of St, 
Paul. ("A treatise to which infi- 
delity has never been able to fabri- 
cate a specious answer. ' ' — Dk.. John- 
son-.) 

Maltby's (E,> Illustrations. 

Mangey's Keply to Toland's Naza- 
renus. 

Markland on Miracles. (Ans. to 
Woolston.) 

Marshall on the Seventy Weeks. 
(Ans. to Collins.) 

McKnight's Truth of the Gospel His- 
tory.) 

Middleton's Case of Abraham de- 
fended. 

Moss (Bp.) on the Resurrection. 

Moyne on Miracles. (Replv to 
Chubb.) 

Nares's Bamjiton Lectures. 1805. 

Nash's Standard of Truth. (Ans. to 
Paine.) 

Newcombe on the Character of the 
Saviour. 

Sure Word of Prophec}'. 

Newton (Bp.) on the Prophecies. 

Nichols's Conference with a Theist. 

Nisbot's Triumphs of Christianity. 

Norrison on Reason and Faith. 

Ogilvie on the Cause of Skepticism. 
(Remarks on Herbert, Shaftesbury, 
Bolingbroke, Hume, and Gibbon.) 

Paley's Evidences, 

Hora? Paulinse. 

Patton's (Will.) Christianity the True 
Theology. (Reply to Paine.) 

Pearson's (Geo.) Hulsean Lectures. 

Porteus's Summary of Evidence. 

Potter's Authoritv of the O. and N. 
Testam. 

Prideaux's Letter to Deists. 

Pye's Moses and Bolingbroke. 

Reynolds's Letter to a Deist. 

Richardson's Hist, and Def. of the 
Canon. 

Riddle's Bampton Lectures. 1852. 

Roberts's Christianity Vindicated. 
(Reply to Volney.) 

Robinson's Usefulness of Revelation. 

Distinguishing Char, of the Gos- 
pel. 

Rogers's Reply to Collins, 

■ Eight Sermons. 

Ross's Reply to Hobbes's Leviathan. 

Rotheram's Truth of Christianity. 

Rust's Discourse on the Use of Reason. 

Ryland (J.) on Infidelity. 1848. 



Schmucker's Modern Infidelity. 
Scott on Inspiration. (Reply to 

Paine.) 
Seaton's Compendious View. (Reply 

to Woolston.) 
Sherlock's Use of Prophecy. (Aiit. 
^ Collins.) V :i \ ^ 

Shuttleworth's Consistency of the 
Scheme of Prov. with itself and 
with Human Reason. 

Skelton's Works. (Reviews all the 
principal deistical writers.) 

Smith's (Elisha) Cure of Deism. 

Smith's (Sam. Stanhope) Lectures, 

Squier's Christ, founded on Reason. 

Stackhouse's State of the Controversy, 

Staples 's Polemic Theology. 

Stebbins's Defence of Christian His- 
tory. 

Advantage of Revelation. 

Boyle Lectures, 1747. 

Charge to the Clergy. 

Stephens (W.) on the Growth of De- 
ism, 

Stephenson on the Miracles of 
Christ. 

Stilling'fleet's Letters to a Deist. 

Sykes (Ashley) on the Christian Reli- 
gion. (Answer to Collins.) 

on Phlagon's Eclipse. 

[Taylor's (H.)] Ben Mordecai's Apol- 
ogy- 
Taylor (Nath.) Preserv. against De- 
ism, 

Tenison's Creed of Hobbes exam- 
ined. 

Thompson's (H.) Infidelity confuted 
on its own Grounds, 

Tillotson's Sermons. 

Toulmin's (J.) Dissertations. 

Walpole's (R.) Misrepresentations, Ig- 
norance, and Plagiarism of Infidel 
Writers. 

Warburton's View of Bolingbroke's 
Philos, 

Divine Legation of Moses, 

Waterland's Scripture Vindicated. 
(Reply to Tindall.) 

Watson's Apology for Christianity. 
(Reply to Gibbon.) 

Apology for the Bible. (Reply 

to Paine.) 

Webster on the Jewish Dispensation, 
(Reply to Morgan.) 

West on the Resurrection of Christ. 

Whately's Historic Doubts relative to 
Napoleon Buonaparte. 

Whiston's Account of Scripture Pro- 
phecies. 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 



579 



Whiston's Examination of late Dis- 
courses. (Keply to Collins.) 

Reason and Philosophy no Ene- 
mies. 

Whitby's Necessity and Use of Eeve- 
lation. 

Wilson's (John) Dissertation oi) 
Christianity. (A powerful work, 
built on Butler's Analogy.) 



Witherspoon's Works. (Lectures. 

Lecture 8.) 
Witty 'sEirst Principles of Deism. 

See large lists of writers on the de- 
istical controversy in Leland on 
Deistical Writers^ and Van Mil- 
dert's Boyle Lectures. 



INFIDELITY. 



Callenbergii Comment, de Scepticis- 
mo. 

Frantz, Briefe an einen Zweifler. 

Holwerda, deVeterum Scepticor. Sen- 
tentia. \ 

Meisneri Historia Doctrinal de vero ; 
Deo. 

Merault, lesApologistes involontaires, 
(Christianity proved by the obser- 
vations of Infidels.) 

Seligmani Exercitationes Academi- 
C3e. 

Voetii (Gisbert.) Dissertationes. 

Vries, Exercitationes Rationales. 

Amer. Biblical Repos. 10 : 89. 

Anderson's Remonstrance. (Ag. Bo- 
lingbroke.) 

Auchincloss's Sophistries of Tho. 
Paine. 

Barnes's Certainty of the Christian 
Religion. 

Barrow's (Isaac) Sermons on the 
Creed. 

Baxter's Unreasonableness of Infi- 
delity. 

Beccher's (Ly.) Lectures on Skepti- 
cism. 

Berkeley's Principles of Human 
Knowledge. 

Bibliotheca Sacra. 1 5 : 693. 

Bidlake's Bampton Lectures. 1811. 

Birk's Difficulties of Belief in the 
Creation and Fall. (Profound.) 

Blake's Infidelity Inexcusable. 

Bradford's (Sam.) Discourses. 

Broughton's Christianity Distinct 
from the Religion of Nature. 

Common Doctrine of the Soul. 

Brown's System of Natural and Re- 
vealed Religion. 

Christian Disciple. 3 : 332. 

Christian Examiner. 17 : 23, 332. 

Christian Month. Spect. 6:75. 

Christian Observer. 12 : 215. 
Christian Quart. Spect. 5 : 469. 
Christian Review. 2:271. 3:134. 6: 

191. 
Crich ton's Converts from Infidelity. 



Davies's Two Antichrists, Infidelity 
and Romanism, viewed in their Rel- 
ative Bearings. (As in 1856. \ 

Disney's (John) Sermons. 

Dove's Logic of the Christian Faith. 

Duncan's Libertine led to Reflection. 

Dwight's (Tim.) Nature and Danger 
of Infidelity. 

Eclectic Rev. New Series. 6:740. 

Edinburgh Monthly Review. 3:60. 

Estlin's (John P.) Sermons 

Evans's (John) Sermons. 

Evans's (J. H.) Checks to Infidelity. 

Faber's Difficulties of Infidelity. 

Farrer's Bampton Lectures. 1862. 

Finch's Bamjtton Lectures. 1797. 

Forbes (D.j on the Sources of Incre- 
dulity. 

Foster's (James) Sermons. 

Gale's Anatomy of Infidelity. 

Girdlestone's Progress of Skepticism 
in England. 1863. 

Grant's Foes of our Faith, and how to 
defeat them. 

Grisenthwaite's Refutation of Tho. 
Paine. 

Hallet's Consistent. Christian. 

Hennel's (Miss) Christianity and In- 
fidelity. 

Hodge's (Cha.) Essays and Reviews. 

Hooker's Popular Infidelity. 

Law's Appeal to all who doubt the 
Gospel. 

Leng's Boyle Lectures. 1719. 

Mansel's Limits of Religious Thought. 

McBurnie's Errors of Infidelity. 
("An armory, hung all over with 
keen weapons." — Evang. Mag.) 

Michaelis's Introd. to the New Testa- 
ment. 

ISIoore's Christian System Vindicated. 

Morgan's Christianity and Modern I. 
compared. 

Neaie's (Erskine) Christianity and 
Infidelity contrasted. (An account 
of the deaths of many prominent 
persons.) 

Nelson's Cause and Cure of Infidelity. 



680 



INDEX TO AUTHORS. 



Now York Review. 2 : 483. 

Nichols's Conference with a Theist. 

North British Rev. 15: 18. 

Ogilvie on the Causes of Infidelity. 

Pearson's (Geo.) Character and Tend- 
ency of Infidelity. 

Post's Skeptical Era in Modern His- 
tor3^ 

Princeton Review. 12 : 31. 

Quarterly Review. 28 : 493. 

Ragfij's Creation's Testimony to its 
God. 

Rennel's (Tha) Remarks on Skepti- 
cism. (An answer to Bichat, Mor- 
gan, etc., on questions touching or- 
ganization and life.) 

Ripley's (Geo.) Latest Form of Infi- 
delity. (Viz., German theology.) 

Schmucker's (S. S.) Errors of Modern 
Infidelity. 

Seed's (Jeremiah) Sermons. 

Simpson's (David) Plea for Religion. 

Smith's (Sara. Stanhope) Sermons. 

Smith's (Sydney) Sermons. 

Smith (Cha.) Shadow of Death. 
(Prize essay.) 

Spear's Creed of Despair. (Prize es- 
say.) 



Spirit of the Pilgrims. 6:204. 8: 1, 
447. 

Stanhope's Truth of the Christian 
Religion. 

Stebbings's Christianity Justified. 

Stillingfleet's (Bp.) Sermons. 

Thompson's Eroncli Philosophy. 

Trcfirey's Infidel's Own Book. 

Turner's Boyle Lectures. 1709. 

Valpy on the Course of Nature. 

Van Mildert's Boyle Lectures. 1802. 
(A historical review of the rise and 
progress of infidelity, with able 
reasonings.) 

"Wilberforce's Practical View of Chris- 
tianity. 

Young's (Edw.) Centaur not Fabu- 
lous. 

Young's (J. R.) Modern Skepticism 
viewed in relation to Modern Sci- 
ence. 1865. (Specially notices Co- 
lenso, Huxley, Lyell, and Darwin.) 

In Fai5p:r"s Dlffrciililes of Infidelity, 

1 New York edition, 1853, is given a 

list of all the books known to have 

been written on the evidence of re- 

i vealed religion. 



^f u^^ 



